Van Gent Jan-Michael, Calvo Richard Yee, Zander Ashley L, Olson Erik J, Sise C Beth, Sise Michael J, Shackford Steven R
From the Trauma Service (J.-M.V.G., R.Y.C., A.L.Z., E.J.O., C.B.S., M.J.S., S.R.S.), Scripps Mercy Hospital, San Diego, California.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017 Dec;83(6):1154-1160. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001652.
Venous thromboembolism, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is typically reported as a composite measure of the quality of trauma center care. Given that recent data suggesting postinjury DVT and PE are distinct clinical processes, a better understanding may result from analyzing them as independent, competing events. Using competing risks analysis, we evaluated our hypothesis that the risk factors and timing of postinjury DVT and PE are different.
We examined all adult trauma patients admitted to our Level I trauma center from July 2006 to December 2011 who received at least one surveillance duplex ultrasound of the lower extremities and who were at high risk or greater for DVT. Outcomes included DVT and PE events, and time-to-event from admission. We used competing risks analysis to evaluate risk factors for DVT while accounting for PE as a competing event, and vice versa.
Of 2,370 patients, 265 (11.2%) had at least one venous thromboembolism event, 235 DVT only, 19 PE only, 11 DVT and PE. Within 2 days of admission, 38% of DVT cases had occurred compared with 26% of PE. Competing risks modeling of DVT as primary event identified older age, severe injury (Injury Severity Score, ≥ 15), mechanical ventilation longer than 4 days, active cancer, history of DVT or PE, major venous repair, male sex, and prophylactic enoxaparin and prophylactic heparin as associated risk factors. Modeling of PE as the primary event showed younger age, nonsevere injury (Injury Severity Score, < 15), central line placement, and prophylactic heparin as relevant factors.
The risk factors for PE and DVT after injury were different, suggesting that they are clinically distinct events that merit independent consideration. Many DVT events occurred early despite prophylaxis, bringing into question the preventability of postinjury DVT. We recommend trauma center quality reporting program measures be revised to account for DVT and PE as unique events.
Epidemiologic, level III.
静脉血栓栓塞症,包括深静脉血栓形成(DVT)和肺栓塞(PE),通常作为创伤中心医疗质量的综合指标进行报告。鉴于近期数据表明伤后DVT和PE是不同的临床过程,将它们作为独立的竞争事件进行分析可能会有更深入的了解。我们采用竞争风险分析方法,评估了我们的假设,即伤后DVT和PE的危险因素及发生时间不同。
我们研究了2006年7月至2011年12月期间入住我院一级创伤中心的所有成年创伤患者,这些患者至少接受了一次下肢双功超声检查,且发生DVT的风险为高风险或更高。结局指标包括DVT和PE事件,以及从入院到事件发生的时间。我们使用竞争风险分析评估DVT的危险因素,同时将PE作为竞争事件进行考虑,反之亦然。
在2370例患者中,265例(11.2%)至少发生了一次静脉血栓栓塞事件,其中仅发生DVT的有235例,仅发生PE的有19例,同时发生DVT和PE的有11例。入院后2天内,38%的DVT病例已经发生,而PE为26%。将DVT作为主要事件的竞争风险模型确定,年龄较大、严重损伤(损伤严重度评分≥15)、机械通气超过4天、活动性癌症、有DVT或PE病史、大静脉修复、男性性别以及预防性使用依诺肝素和预防性使用肝素为相关危险因素。将PE作为主要事件的模型显示,年龄较小、非严重损伤(损伤严重度评分<15)、中心静脉置管以及预防性使用肝素为相关因素。
伤后PE和DVT的危险因素不同,表明它们是临床上不同的事件,值得分别考虑。尽管采取了预防措施,许多DVT事件仍早期发生,这使得伤后DVT的可预防性受到质疑。我们建议修订创伤中心质量报告计划措施,将DVT和PE作为独立事件进行统计。
流行病学,三级。