Sedina Lewis1, Jessica Glen1, Dalia Dawoud2, Sofia Dias3, Jill Cobb1, Xavier L Griffin4, Nigel Rossiter5, Michael Reed6, Carlos Sharpin1, Gerard Stansby7, Peter Barry8. 1. National Guideline Centre, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK. 2. Clinical Pharmacy Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt; Centre for Health Technology Evaluation, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, UK. Electronic address: dalia.dawoud@nice.org.uk. 3. University of York, York, UK. 4. Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 5. Basingstoke & North Hampshire Hospital, Basingstoke, UK. 6. Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Northumbria, UK. 7. Newcastle University and Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. 8. University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital-associated venous thromboembolism is a major patient safety concern. Provision of prophylaxis to patients admitted for elective total knee replacement surgery has been proposed as an effective strategy to reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism. We aimed to assess the relative efficacy and safety of all available prophylaxis strategies in this setting. METHODS: We did a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials to assess the relative efficacy and safety of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis strategies and to populate an economic model that assessed the cost-effectiveness of these strategies and informed the updated National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline recommendations for patients undergoing elective total knee replacement surgery. The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Embase, and Medline were last searched on June 19, 2017, with key terms relating to the population (venous thromboembolism and total knee replacement) and the interventions compared, including available pharmacological and mechanical interventions. Outcomes of interest were deep vein thrombosis (symptomatic and asymptomatic), pulmonary embolism, and major bleeding. Risk of bias was assessed, and relevant data extracted from the included randomised controlled trials for the network meta-analyses. Relative risks (RR; with 95% credible intervals [95% CrI]) compared to no prophylaxis, median ranks (with 95% CrI), and the probability of being the best intervention were calculated. The study was done in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. FINDINGS: 25 randomised controlled trials were included in the network meta-analyses. 23 trials (19 interventions; n=15 028) were included in the deep vein thrombosis network, 12 in the pulmonary embolism network (13 interventions; n=15 555), and 19 in the major bleeding network (11 interventions; n=19 797). Risk of bias ranged from very low to high. Rivaroxaban ranked first for prevention of deep vein thrombosis (RR 0·12 [95% CrI 0·06-0·22]). Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH; standard prophylactic dose, 28-35 days) ranked first in the pulmonary embolism network (RR 0·02 [95% CrI 0·00-3·86]) and LMWH (low prophylactic dose, 10-14 days) ranked first in the major bleeding network (odds ratio 0·08 [95% CrI 0·00-1·76]), but the results for pulmonary embolism and major bleeding are highly uncertain. INTERPRETATION: Single prophylaxis strategies are more effective in prevention of deep vein thrombosis in the elective total knee replacement population than combination strategies, with rivaroxaban being the most effective. The results of the pulmonary embolism and major bleeding meta-analyses are uncertain and no clear conclusion can be made other than what is biologically plausible (eg, that no prophylaxis and mechanical prophylaxis strategies should have the lowest risk of major bleeding). FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
BACKGROUND: Hospital-associated venous thromboembolism is a major patient safety concern. Provision of prophylaxis to patients admitted for elective total knee replacement surgery has been proposed as an effective strategy to reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism. We aimed to assess the relative efficacy and safety of all available prophylaxis strategies in this setting. METHODS: We did a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials to assess the relative efficacy and safety of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis strategies and to populate an economic model that assessed the cost-effectiveness of these strategies and informed the updated National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline recommendations for patients undergoing elective total knee replacement surgery. The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Embase, and Medline were last searched on June 19, 2017, with key terms relating to the population (venous thromboembolism and total knee replacement) and the interventions compared, including available pharmacological and mechanical interventions. Outcomes of interest were deep vein thrombosis (symptomatic and asymptomatic), pulmonary embolism, and major bleeding. Risk of bias was assessed, and relevant data extracted from the included randomised controlled trials for the network meta-analyses. Relative risks (RR; with 95% credible intervals [95% CrI]) compared to no prophylaxis, median ranks (with 95% CrI), and the probability of being the best intervention were calculated. The study was done in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. FINDINGS: 25 randomised controlled trials were included in the network meta-analyses. 23 trials (19 interventions; n=15 028) were included in the deep vein thrombosis network, 12 in the pulmonary embolism network (13 interventions; n=15 555), and 19 in the major bleeding network (11 interventions; n=19 797). Risk of bias ranged from very low to high. Rivaroxaban ranked first for prevention of deep vein thrombosis (RR 0·12 [95% CrI 0·06-0·22]). Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH; standard prophylactic dose, 28-35 days) ranked first in the pulmonary embolism network (RR 0·02 [95% CrI 0·00-3·86]) and LMWH (low prophylactic dose, 10-14 days) ranked first in the major bleeding network (odds ratio 0·08 [95% CrI 0·00-1·76]), but the results for pulmonary embolism and major bleeding are highly uncertain. INTERPRETATION: Single prophylaxis strategies are more effective in prevention of deep vein thrombosis in the elective total knee replacement population than combination strategies, with rivaroxaban being the most effective. The results of the pulmonary embolism and major bleeding meta-analyses are uncertain and no clear conclusion can be made other than what is biologically plausible (eg, that no prophylaxis and mechanical prophylaxis strategies should have the lowest risk of major bleeding). FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
Authors: Maura Marcucci; Itziar Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta; Stephen Yang; Federico Germini; Shyla Gupta; Arnav Agarwal; Matthew Ventresca; Shaowen Tang; Gian Paolo Morgano; Mengxiao Wang; Muhammad Muneeb Ahmed; Ignacio Neumann; Ariel Izcovich; Juan Criniti; Federico Popoff; P J Devereaux; Philipp Dahm; David Anderson; Lauri I Lavikainen; Kari A O Tikkinen; Gordon H Guyatt; Holger J Schünemann; Philippe D Violette Journal: BMJ Date: 2022-03-09