Literature DB >> 6181844

Prediction and prophylaxis of postoperative thromboembolism--a comparison between peroperative calf muscle stimulation with groups of impulses and dextran 40.

B Lindström, C Holmdahl, O Jonsson, K Korsan-Bengtsen, S Lindberg, B Petrusson, S Pettersson, J Wikstrand, J Wojciechowski.   

Abstract

The effects of peroperative electrical calf muscle stimulation with groups of impulses giving a short lasting tetanus of the calf muscles on postoperative deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) were compared with that of dextran 40 given per and postoperatively. The incidence of DVT and PE during the first 4-6 postoperative days was recorded. The diagnosis of DVT was based on the 125I-fibrinogen uptake test and phlebography and of PE on pre- and postoperative perfusion pulmonary scintigram and chest X-ray examination. Both methods reduced the incidence of PE. Calf muscle stimulation reduced the DVT incidence in patients with malignant disease while the reduction in DVT incidence for the whole group only was significant in the stimulation as well as the dextran 40 group. Mean values for preoperatively determined levels of antithrombin III, beta-thromboglobulin, fibrinopeptide A, plasminogen and ability to release fibrinolytic activity during venous stasis did not differ between those patients who developed or those who did not develop postoperative DVT or PE. However, antithrombin III levels below 80 per cent appeared to predispose to postoperative thromboembolism. The two prophylactic methods have similar effects on the incidence of postoperative thromboembolism. The stimulation method has certain advantages due to its safety and simplicity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1982        PMID: 6181844     DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800691102

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  10 in total

1.  Post-operative thromboembolism in neurosurgery. A study on the prophylactic effect of calf muscle stimulation plus dextran compared to low-dose heparin.

Authors:  S Boström; E Holmgren; O Jonsson; S Lindberg; B Lindström; I Winsö; B Zachrisson
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.216

2.  Fibrinopeptide A and fibrinogen fragment B beta 15-42 and their relation to the operative trauma and post-operative thromboembolism in neurosurgical patients.

Authors:  S Boström; E Holmgren; O Jonsson; B Lindström; L Stigendal
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 2.216

Review 3.  Prevention of venous thromboembolism in general surgical patients. Results of meta-analysis.

Authors:  G P Clagett; J S Reisch
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 4.  Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Shahab Hajibandeh; Shahin Hajibandeh; George A Antoniou; James Rh Scurr; Francesco Torella
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-11-21

5.  Role of calf muscle stimulation in the prevention of DVT in Indian patients undergoing surgeries for fractures around the hip.

Authors:  Aman Goyal; Sumit Arora; Sumit Batra; Rohit Sharma; Mahesh Kumar Mittal; Vinod K Sharma
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.251

6.  Neuromuscular electrostimulation viathe common peroneal nerve promotes lower limb blood flow in a below-kneecast: A potential for thromboprophylaxis.

Authors:  D J Warwick; A Shaikh; S Gadola; M Stokes; P Worsley; D Bain; A T Tucker; S D Gadola
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2013-09-02       Impact factor: 5.853

7.  Two Cases of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation of the Common Peroneal Nerve Successfully Treating Refractory, Multifactorial Leg Edema.

Authors:  Matthew V Ingves; Adam H Power
Journal:  J Investig Med High Impact Case Rep       Date:  2014-11-20

8.  The geko™ electro-stimulation device for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: a NICE medical technology guidance.

Authors:  Jennifer A Summers; James Clinch; Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan; Andy Healy; Viktoria McMillan; Elizabeth Morris; Tiago Rua; Mercy Ofuya; Yanzhong Wang; Paul W Dimmock; Cornelius Lewis; Janet L Peacock; Stephen F Keevil
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.561

Review 9.  Electrical muscle stimulation in thomboprophylaxis: review and a derived hypothesis about thrombogenesis-the 4th factor.

Authors:  Christos Stefanou
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-06-24

Review 10.  Effect of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on the recovery of people with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit: A narrative review.

Authors:  Louise C Burgess; Lalitha Venugopalan; James Badger; Tamsyn Street; Gad Alon; Jonathan C Jarvis; Thomas W Wainwright; Tamara Everington; Paul Taylor; Ian D Swain
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 2.912

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.