Postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increasingly viewed as a quality of care metric, although risk-adjusted incident rates of postoperative VTE and VTE after hospital discharge (VTEDC) are not available. We sought to characterize the predictors of VTE and VTEDC to develop nomograms to estimate individual risk of VTE and VTEDC.Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we identified 471,867 patients who underwent inpatient abdominal or thoracic operations between 2005 and 2010. We excluded primary vascular and spine operations. We built logistic regression models using stepwise model selection and constructed nomograms for VTE and VTEDC with statistically significant covariates.The overall, unadjusted, 30-d incidence of VTE and VTEDC was 1.5% and 0.5%, respectively. Annual incidence rates remained unchanged over the study period. On multivariate analysis, age, body mass index, presence of preoperative infection, operation for cancer, procedure type (spleen highest), multivisceral resection, and non-bariatric laparoscopic surgery were significant predictors for VTE and VTEDC. Other significant predictors for VTE, but not VTEDC, included a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, disseminated cancer, and emergent operation. We constructed and validated nomograms by bootstrapping. The concordance indices for VTE and VTEDC were 0.77 and 0.67, respectively.Substantial variation exists in the incidence of VTE and VTEDC, depending on patient and procedural factors. We constructed nomograms to predict individual risk of 30-d VTE and VTEDC. These may allow more targeted quality improvement interventions to reduce VTE and VTEDC in high-risk general and thoracic surgery patients.Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

There is widespread evidence that cancer confers an increased risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). This risk is thought to vary among different cancer types. The purpose of this study is to better define the incidence of thrombotic complications among patients undergoing surgical treatment for a spectrum of prevalent cancer diagnoses in contemporary practice.All patients undergoing one of 11 cancer surgical operations (breast resection, hysterectomy, prostatectomy, colectomy, gastrectomy, lung resection, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, cystectomy, esophagectomy, and nephrectomy) were identified by Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2007-2009). The study endpoints were DVT, pulmonary embolism (PE), and overall postoperative venous thromboembolic events (VTE) within 1 month of the index procedure. Multivariate logistic regression was utilized to calculate adjusted odds ratios for each endpoint.Over the study interval, 43,808 of the selected cancer operations were performed. The incidence of DVT, PE, and total VTE within 1 month following surgery varied widely across a spectrum of cancer diagnoses, ranging from 0.19%, 0.12%, and 0.28% for breast resection to 6.1%, 2.4%, and 7.3%, respectively, for esophagectomy. Compared with breast cancer, the incidence of VTE ranged from a 1.31-fold increase in VTE associated with gastrectomy (95% confidence interval, 0.73-2.37; P =.4) to a 2.68-fold increase associated with hysterectomy (95% confidence interval, 1.43-5.01; P =.002). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that inpatient status, steroid use, advanced age (≥60 years), morbid obesity (body mass index ≥35), blood transfusion, reintubation, cardiac arrest, postoperative infectious complications, and prolonged hospitalization were independently associated with increased risk of VTE.The incidence of VTE and thromboembolic complications associated with cancer surgery varies substantially. These findings suggest that both tumor type and resection magnitude may impact VTE risk. Accordingly, such data support diagnosis and procedural-specific guidelines for perioperative VTE prophylaxis and can be used to anticipate the risk of potentially preventable morbidity.Copyright © 2012 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a critical cardiovascular emergency requiring prompt, accurate diagnosis. CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the diagnostic gold standard, yet rising case volumes and radiologist shortages challenge clinical workflows. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers potential to enhance diagnostic precision and efficiency. This multicenter study validates the performance of a commercially available AI system compared with radiologist interpretation alone and in combination.

Venous thromboembolism prevention during critical illness is a widely used quality metric. The objective of this systematic review was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of heparin thromboprophylaxis in medical-surgical patients in the ICU.We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Clinicaltrials.gov, and personal files through May 2012.Randomized trials in adult medical-surgical ICU patients comparing any heparin (unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin) with each other or no anticoagulant prophylaxis, evaluating deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, or mortality.Independently, in duplicate, we abstracted trial characteristics, outcomes, and risk of bias.Seven trials involved 7,226 patients. Any heparin thromboprophylaxis compared with placebo reduced rates of deep vein thrombosis (pooled risk ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.41, 0.63]; p<0.0001; I=77%) and pulmonary embolism (risk ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.28, 0.97]; p=0.04; I=0%) but not symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (risk ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.59, 1.25]; p=0.43). Major bleeding (risk ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.56, 1.21]; p=0.32; I=50%) and mortality (risk ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.78, 1.02]; p=0.09; I=0%) rates were similar. Compared with unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin reduced rates of pulmonary embolism (risk ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.39, 1.00]; p=0.05; I=53%) and symptomatic pulmonary embolism (risk ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.34, 0.97]; p=0.04) but not deep vein thrombosis (risk ratio, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.74, 1.08]; p=0.26; I=0%), symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (risk ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.60, 1.25]; p=0.44; I=0%), major bleeding (risk ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.75, 1.26]; p=0.83; I=0%), or mortality (risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.82, 1.04]; p=0.20; I=31%).Trial evidence to date suggests that any type of heparin thromboprophylaxis decreases deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in medical-surgical critically ill patients, and low-molecular-weight heparin compared with bid unfractionated heparin decreases pulmonary embolism and symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Major bleeding and mortality rates do not appear to be significantly influenced by heparin thromboprophylaxis in the ICU setting. Trial methodology, indirectness, and the heterogeneity and imprecision of some results temper inferences from this literature.

The analysis of risk stratification of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) among 120 post-operative patients in critical care units using the Modified Caprini Risk Assessment Tool is of interest. Most participants (over 80%) in both experimental and control groups were categorized as high risk for DVT. Statistical analysis revealed significant associations between higher Caprini scores and clinical variables such as age, BMI, mobility limitation, emergency surgery, central venous catheter presence, swollen leg, and longer surgical duration (p < 0.05). Demographic variables like gender, income, and dietary habits showed no significant association. Thus, we show the Caprini score as an effective tool for identifying high-risk patients who may benefit from early intervention. This study underscores the importance of pre-operative risk profiling to guide targeted DVT prevention strategies in critical care settings.

An increasing number of individuals are on novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC) for anticoagulation instead of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and roughly 10% of these individuals will require interruption of these agents for procedures annually. Recent evidence surrounding bridging as well as the FDA approval of a new NOAC call for a comprehensive review and update regarding periprocedural NOAC management. The periprocedural management of NOACs involves striking a balance between the risks of bleeding and thromboembolism associated with interruption, bridging, and reinitiation of anticoagulation. NOACs have a distinct pharmacokinetic advantage in this setting with their quick onset and elimination from the body. Procedures at low risk for bleeding do not require interruption and can be scheduled at the start of the next dosing interval. Procedures at moderate-high risk of bleeding require interruption of NOAC for 5 half lives prior to the procedure to allow for adequate elimination of the drug. In light of new evidence highlighting the risks of bleeding, and given shorter "unprotected" times with NOAC interruption versus VKA, patients at low-moderate risk for thromboembolism should not be bridged when "unprotected" time is less than 96 h. For patients at high risk for thromboembolism, individual patient and surgical factors need to be considered before the decision to bridge is made. The benefit of bridging these patients who have a considerable risk of bleeding may not outweigh the benefits. Focused randomized studies on periprocedural management of NOACs are urgently needed.Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

This JAMA Clinical Guidelines Synopsis summarizes the American College of Chest Physicians’ 2022 guideline on perioperative management of patients taking oral anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy who are undergoing an elective surgery or procedure.

Nearly 100 years after its discovery, unfractionated heparin (UFH) remains a widely used anticoagulant for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and several other thrombotic and prothrombotic conditions. Decades of experience and investigation have contributed to our knowledge of this agent, but crucial questions regarding its optimal use in clinical practice remain unanswered. This review will critically examine the evidence for dosing and laboratory monitoring of UFH in the management of VTE, and highlight areas of uncertainty and future research.Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Heparin remains a foundational parenteral anticoagulant across both acute and chronic care settings. This narrative review summarizes clinical indications and dosing of unfractionated (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). It also details laboratory monitoring using activated partial thromboplastin (APTT), anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa), activated clotting time (ACT) and viscoelastic testing (VET), including common pitfalls and interferences. We provide considerations for specific populations as well as complications including heparin resistance, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and heparin reversal strategies. Future research directions include harmonization of therapeutic ranges, mitigation of assay interference and prospective evaluation on monitoring, particular in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), pregnancy and cardiac surgical settings.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) poses a significant health risk to patients with morbid obesity or high body weight. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are emerging treatments, but their effectiveness and safety compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in this population are yet to be thoroughly studied.

The effectiveness and safety of non-heparin anticoagulants for the treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) are not fully established, and the optimal treatment strategy is unknown. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to determine precise rates of platelet recovery, new or progressive thromboembolism (TE), major bleeding, and death for all non-heparin anticoagulants and to study potential sources of variability.Following a detailed protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42020219027), EMBASE and Medline were searched for all studies reporting clinical outcomes of patients treated with non-heparin anticoagulants (argatroban, danaparoid, fondaparinux, direct oral anticoagulants [DOAC], bivalirudin, and other hirudins) for acute HIT. Proportions of patients with the outcomes of interest were pooled using a random-effects model for each drug. The influence of the patient population, the diagnostic test used, the study design, and the type of article was assessed.Out of 3'194 articles screened, 92 studies with 119 treatment groups describing 4'698 patients were included. The pooled rates of platelet recovery ranged from 74% (bivalirudin) to 99% (fondaparinux), TE from 1% (fondaparinux) to 7% (danaparoid), major bleeding from 1% (DOAC) to 14% (bivalirudin), and death from 7% (fondaparinux) to 19% (bivalirudin). Confidence intervals were mostly overlapping, and results were not influenced by patient population, diagnostic test used, study design, or type of article.Effectiveness and safety outcomes were similar among various anticoagulants, and significant factors affecting these outcomes were not identified. These findings support fondaparinux and DOACs as viable alternatives to conventional anticoagulants for treatment of acute HIT in clinical practice. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

There is a growing clinical and scientific interest in catheter-directed therapy (CDT) of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Currently, CDT should be considered for patients with high-risk PE, in whom thrombolysis is contraindicated or has failed. Also, CDT is a treatment option for initially stable patients in whom anticoagulant treatment fails, i.e., those who experience haemodynamic deterioration despite adequately dosed anticoagulation. However, the definition of treatment failure (primary reperfusion therapy or anticoagulation alone) remains an important area of uncertainty. Moreover, several techniques for CDT are available without evidence supporting one over the other, and variation in practice with regard to periprocedural anticoagulation is considerable. The aim of this position paper is to describe the currently available CDT approaches in PE patients and to standardise patient selection, the timing and technique of the procedure itself as well as anticoagulation regimens during CDT. We discuss several clinical scenarios of the clinical evaluation of the "efficacy" of thrombolysis and anticoagulation, including treatment failure with haemodynamic deterioration and treatment failure based on a lack of improvement. This clinical consensus statement serves as a practical guide for CDT, complementary to the formal guidelines.

Summary: The number of endovascular interventional procedures for catheter-based therapy (CBT) of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), has been increasing over the past years. The development of more efficient thrombectomy systems for CBT of VTE has potentially enhanced the efficacy of interventional treatment of VTE. Nevertheless, indications for CBT of VTE, i.e. catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) or catheter-based mechanical thrombus removal, need to be established based on existing data and expert consensus. Vascular experts should be involved in the decision-making process on CBTs in patients with acute VTE, and thrombus removal procedures should be performed in centers with experience in interventional treatment of VTE. This guideline document of the European Society of Vascular Medicine (ESVM) provides recommendations on indications and management of CBT in acute VTE and is endorsed by the European national societies of Vascular Medicine.

Acute pulmonary embolism is the third leading cause of cardiovascular death, with most pulmonary embolism-related mortality associated with acute right ventricular failure. Although there has recently been increased clinical attention to acute pulmonary embolism with the adoption of multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams, mortality of patients with pulmonary embolism who present with hemodynamic compromise remains high when current guideline-directed therapy is followed. Because historical data and practice patterns affect current consensus treatment recommendations, surgical embolectomy has largely been relegated to patients who have contraindications to other treatments or when other treatment modalities fail. Despite a selection bias toward patients with greater illness, a growing body of literature describes the safety and efficacy of the surgical management of acute pulmonary embolism, especially in the hemodynamically compromised population. The purpose of this document is to describe modern techniques, strategies, and outcomes of surgical embolectomy and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and to suggest strategies to better understand the role of surgery in the management of pulmonary embolisms.