1.
Is pharmacological anticoagulant prophylaxis necessary for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery?
Kochai, A, Cicekli, O, Bayam, L, Türker, M, Sariyilmaz, K, Erkorkmaz, Ü
Medicine. 2019;(29):e16552
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
We report the outcomes of mechanical prophylaxis and chemoprophylaxis in patients who underwent elective surgery for idiopathic adolescent scoliosis (AIS).We retrospectively studied the patients who underwent posterior spinal instrumentation for AIS. The patients were divided into three groups: Group A low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) started at 8 hours after surgery; Group B LMWH started at 24 hr after surgery; Group C did not receive chemoprophylaxis. The data about wound oozing, need for transfusion, preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin level, length of stay in hospital, interval from the surgery to removal of closed suction drainage tube, postoperative blood loss from closed suction drain, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE) were investigated.The mean age and Lenke classification for all the groups were similar. No DVT or PE was detected in any group. The mean blood loss from the drain was higher in Group A (400 mL) and Group B (450 mL) when compared to Group C (150 mL) (P = .001). There were more wound oozing in Groups A (5) and B (6) than in Group C (3) (P = .585). Three patients in Group B, 3 patients in Group A, and no patient in Group C had superficial infections. However, there was no statistical difference between the groups (P = .182). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in Groups A (6 days) and B (6 days) then in Group C (5 days) (P = .001).Our current study claims that chemoprophylaxis is not necessary for the patients without risk factors after AIS surgery. Early mobilization and mechanoprophylaxis represents adequate prophylaxis in addition to pain management and well hydration in patients' routine treatment. The complications of chemoprophylaxis are not correlated to the initiation time of prophylaxis.
2.
The risks of thromboembolism vs. recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding after interruption of systemic anticoagulation in hospitalized inpatients with gastrointestinal bleeding: a prospective study.
Sengupta, N, Feuerstein, JD, Patwardhan, VR, Tapper, EB, Ketwaroo, GA, Thaker, AM, Leffler, DA
The American journal of gastroenterology. 2015;(2):328-35
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Anticoagulants carry a significant risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Data regarding the safety of anticoagulation continuation/cessation after GIB are limited. We sought to determine the safety and risk of continuation of anticoagulation after GIB. METHODS We conducted a prospective observational cohort study on consecutive patients admitted to the hospital who had GIB while on systemic anticoagulation. Patients were classified into two groups at hospital discharge after GIB: those who resumed anticoagulation and those who had anticoagulation discontinued. Patients in both groups were contacted by phone 90 days after discharge to determine the following outcomes: (i) thromboembolic events, (ii) hospital readmissions related to GIB, and (iii) mortality. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards were used to determine factors associated with thrombotic events, rebleeding, and death. RESULTS We identified 197 patients who developed GIB while on systemic anticoagulation (n=145, 74% on warfarin). Following index GIB, anticoagulation was discontinued in 76 patients (39%) at discharge. In-hospital transfusion requirements, need for intensive care unit care, and etiology of GIB were similar between the two groups. During the follow-up period, 7 (4%) patients suffered a thrombotic event and 27 (14%) patients were readmitted for GIB. Anticoagulation continuation was independently associated on multivariate regression with a lower risk of major thrombotic episodes within 90 days (hazard ratio (HR)=0.121, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.006-0.812, P=0.03). Patients with any malignancy at time of GIB had an increased risk of thromboembolism in follow-up (HR=6.1, 95% CI=1.18-28.3, P=0.03). Anticoagulation continuation at discharge was not significantly associated with an increased risk of recurrent GIB at 90 days (HR=2.17, 95% CI=0.861-6.67, P=0.10) or death within 90 days (HR=0.632, 95% CI=0.216-1.89, P=0.40). CONCLUSIONS Restarting anticoagulation at discharge after GIB was associated with fewer thromboembolic events without a significantly increased risk of recurrent GIB at 90 days. The benefits of continuing anticoagulation at discharge may outweigh the risks of recurrent GIB.