Literature DB >> 33214216

Efficacy of pre-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis on incidence of venous thromboembolism following major gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Steven Bisch1, Rachelle Findley2, Christina Ince1, Maria Nardell3, Gregg Nelson1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Venous thromboembolism remains a significant complication following major gynecologic surgery. Evidence is lacking on whether it is beneficial to give pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis pre-operatively. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the role of pre-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in preventing post-operative venous thromboembolism.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials were searched to find randomized controlled, cohort, and case-control trials comparing pre-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis to no prophylaxis, mechanical prophylaxis, or only post-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis for open and minimally invasive major gynecologic surgery (benign and malignant conditions). Two authors independently assessed abstracts, full-text articles, and methodological quality. Data were extracted and pooled using ORs for random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was explored using forest plots, Q-statistic, and I2 statistics. Planned subgroup analysis of use of sequential compression devices, equivalent versus non-equivalent post-operative prophylaxis, cancer diagnosis, and methodological quality were performed.
RESULTS: Some 503 unique studies were found, and 16 studies (28 806 patients) were included in the systematic review. Twelve studies (14 273 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The OR for incidence of post-operative venous thromboembolism was 0.59 (95% CI 0.39, 0.89), favoring pre-operative pharmacologic thromboembolism prophylaxis compared with no pre-operative pharmacologic prophylaxis (Q=13.80, I2=20.30). In studies where post-operative care was equivalent between groups, the OR for venous thromboembolism was 0.56 (95% CI 0.22, 1.40). Pre-operative pharmacologic prophylaxis demonstrated greatest benefit when utilized with both intra-operative and post-operative sequential compression devices (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.64) compared with when no sequential compression devices were utilized (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.63, 2.56). When looking at only studies determined to be of high quality, the results no longer reached significance (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.36, 1.46).
CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis decreases the odds of venous thromboembolism in the peri-operative period for major gynecologic oncology surgery by approximately 40%. It remains unclear whether this benefit is present in benign and minor procedures. Adequately powered studies are needed. © IGCS and ESGO 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  surgery; venous thromboembolism

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33214216      PMCID: PMC7854514          DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001991

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  23 in total

1.  ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 84: Prevention of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 2.  Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in gynecologic surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  David D Rahn; Mamta M Mamik; Tatiana V D Sanses; Kristen A Matteson; Sarit O Aschkenazi; Blair B Washington; Adam C Steinberg; Heidi S Harvie; James C Lukban; Katrin Uhlig; Ethan M Balk; Vivian W Sung
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?

Authors:  A R Jadad; R A Moore; D Carroll; C Jenkinson; D J Reynolds; D J Gavaghan; H J McQuay
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1996-02

4.  Double prophylaxis for deep venous thrombosis in patients with gynecologic oncology who are undergoing laparotomy: does preoperative anticoagulation matter?

Authors:  Jenny M Whitworth; Kellie E Schneider; Peter J Frederick; Michael A Finan; Eddie Reed; Janelle M Fauci; J Michael Straughn; Rodney P Rocconi
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 3.437

5.  Prophylactic anticoagulation as a possible cause of inguinal lymphocyst after radical vulvectomy and inguinal lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  M S Piver; J H Malfetano; S B Lele; R H Moore
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1983-07       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  The natural history of postoperative venous thromboemboli in gynecologic oncology: a prospective study of 382 patients.

Authors:  D L Clarke-Pearson; I S Synan; R E Colemen; W Hinshaw; W T Creasman
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1984-04-15       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Thromboembolism complicating surgery for cervical and uterine malignancy: incidence, risk factors, and prophylaxis.

Authors:  D L Clarke-Pearson; F R Jelovsek; W T Creasman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1983-01       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  A prospective registry of 5,451 patients with ultrasound-confirmed deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Samuel Z Goldhaber; Victor F Tapson
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 2.778

9.  A protocol of dual prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism prevention in gynecologic cancer patients.

Authors:  M Heather Einstein; David M Kushner; Joseph P Connor; Alex A Bohl; Thomas J Best; Michael D Evans; Richard J Chappell; Ellen M Hartenbach
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  How should systematic reviewers handle conference abstracts? A view from the trenches.

Authors:  Roberta W Scherer; Ian J Saldanha
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2019-11-07
View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  2022 international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer, including patients with COVID-19.

Authors:  Dominique Farge; Corinne Frere; Jean M Connors; Alok A Khorana; Ajay Kakkar; Cihan Ay; Andres Muñoz; Benjamin Brenner; Pedro H Prata; Dialina Brilhante; Darko Antic; Patricia Casais; María Cecilia Guillermo Esposito; Takayuki Ikezoe; Syed A Abutalib; Luis A Meillon-García; Henri Bounameaux; Ingrid Pabinger; James Douketis
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 54.433

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.