Suppr超能文献

低分子量肝素用于腹部或盆腔手术的延长血栓预防

Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin for abdominal or pelvic surgery.

作者信息

Felder Seth, Rasmussen Morten Schnack, King Ray, Sklow Bradford, Kwaan Mary, Madoff Robert, Jensen Christine

机构信息

Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Aug 26;8(8):CD004318. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004318.pub5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This an update of the review first published in 2009.Major abdominal and pelvic surgery carries a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The efficacy of thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) administered during the in-hospital period is well-documented, but the optimal duration of prophylaxis after surgery remains controversial. Some studies suggest that patients undergoing major abdominopelvic surgery benefit from prolongation of the prophylaxis up to 28 days after surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of prolonged thromboprophylaxis with LMWH for at least 14 days after abdominal or pelvic surgery compared with thromboprophylaxis administered during the in-hospital period only in preventing late onset VTE.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed electronic searches on 28 October 2017 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and registered trials (Clinicaltrials.gov October 28, 2017 and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) 28 October 2017). Abstract books from major congresses addressing thromboembolism were handsearched from 1976 to 28 October 2017, as were reference lists from relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We assessed randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing prolonged thromboprophylaxis (≥ fourteen days) with any LMWH agent with placebo, or other methods, or both to thromboprophylaxis during the admission period only. The population consisted of persons undergoing abdominal or pelvic surgery for both benign and malignant pathology. The outcome measures included VTE (deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE)) as assessed by objective means (venography, ultrasonography, pulmonary ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy, spiral computed tomography (CT) scan or autopsy). We excluded studies exclusively reporting on clinical diagnosis of VTE without objective confirmation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors identified studies and extracted data. Outcomes were VTE (DVT or PE) assessed by objective means. Safety outcomes were defined as bleeding complications and mortality within three months after surgery. Sensitivity analyses were also performed with unpublished studies excluded, and with study participants limited to those undergoing solely open and not laparoscopic surgery. We used a fixed-effect model for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven RCTs (1728 participants) evaluating prolonged thromboprophylaxis with LMWH compared with control or placebo. The searches resulted in 1632 studies, of which we excluded 1528. One hundred and four abstracts, eligible for inclusion, were assessed of which seven studies met the inclusion criteria.For the primary outcome, the incidence of overall VTE after major abdominal or pelvic surgery was 13.2% in the control group compared to 5.3% in the patients receiving out-of-hospital LMWH (Mantel Haentzel (M-H) odds ratio (OR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.54; I = 28%; moderate-quality evidence).For the secondary outcome of all DVT, seven studies, n = 1728, showed prolonged thromboprophylaxis with LMWH to be associated with a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of all DVT (M-H OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.55; I = 28%; moderate-quality evidence).We found a similar reduction when analysis was limited to incidence in proximal DVT (M-H OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.47; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).The incidence of symptomatic VTE was also reduced from 1.0% in the control group to 0.1% in patients receiving prolonged thromboprophylaxis, which approached significance (M-H OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.11; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).No difference in the incidence of bleeding between the control and LMWH group was found, 2.8% and 3.4%, respectively (M-H OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.81; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).No difference in mortality between the control and LMWH group was found, 3.8% and 3.9%, respectively (M-H OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.84; moderate-quality evidence).Estimates of heterogeneity ranged between 0% and 28% depending on the analysis, suggesting low or unimportant heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with LMWH significantly reduces the risk of VTE compared to thromboprophylaxis during hospital admittance only, without increasing bleeding complications or mortality after major abdominal or pelvic surgery. This finding also holds true for DVT alone, and for both proximal and symptomatic DVT. The quality of the evidence is moderate and provides moderate support for routine use of prolonged thromboprophylaxis. Given the low heterogeneity between studies and the consistent and moderate evidence of a decrease in risk for VTE, our findings suggest that additional studies may help refine the degree of risk reduction but would be unlikely to significantly influence these findings. This updated review provides additional evidence and supports the previous results reported in the 2009 review.

摘要

背景

这是对2009年首次发表的综述的更新。腹部和盆腔大手术具有较高的静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)风险。住院期间使用低分子量肝素(LMWH)进行血栓预防的疗效已有充分记录,但术后预防的最佳持续时间仍存在争议。一些研究表明,接受腹部盆腔大手术的患者从延长预防时间至术后28天中获益。

目的

评估与仅在住院期间进行血栓预防相比,腹部或盆腔手术后使用LMWH延长血栓预防至少14天在预防迟发性VTE方面的疗效和安全性。

检索方法

我们于2017年10月28日在Cochrane对照试验中央注册库、MEDLINE、Embase、LILACS以及注册试验(2017年10月28日的Clinicaltrials.gov和2017年10月28日的世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP))上进行了电子检索。手工检索了1976年至2017年10月28日主要血栓栓塞大会的摘要集以及相关研究的参考文献列表。

入选标准

我们评估了随机对照临床试验(RCT),这些试验比较了使用任何LMWH制剂进行延长血栓预防(≥14天)与安慰剂或其他方法,或两者与仅在住院期间进行血栓预防的情况。研究人群包括因良性和恶性病变接受腹部或盆腔手术的患者。结局指标包括通过客观手段(静脉造影、超声、肺通气/灌注闪烁扫描、螺旋计算机断层扫描(CT)或尸检)评估的VTE(深静脉血栓形成(DVT)或肺栓塞(PE))。我们排除了仅报告未经客观证实的VTE临床诊断的研究。

数据收集与分析

综述作者识别研究并提取数据。结局指标为通过客观手段评估的VTE(DVT或PE)。安全性结局定义为术后三个月内的出血并发症和死亡率。还进行了敏感性分析,排除未发表的研究,并将研究参与者限于仅接受开放手术而非腹腔镜手术的患者。我们使用固定效应模型进行分析。

主要结果

我们识别出七项RCT(1728名参与者),评估了与对照或安慰剂相比使用LMWH进行延长血栓预防的情况。检索共得到1632项研究,其中我们排除了1528项。评估了104篇符合纳入标准的摘要,其中七项研究符合纳入标准。对于主要结局,腹部或盆腔大手术后对照组的总体VTE发生率为13.2%,而接受院外LMWH治疗的患者为5.3%(Mantel Haentzel(M-H)比值比(OR)0.38,95%置信区间(CI)0.26至0.54;I² = 28%;中等质量证据)。对于所有DVT的次要结局,七项研究(n = 1728)表明使用LMWH进行延长血栓预防与所有DVT发生率的统计学显著降低相关(M-H OR 0.39,95% CI 0.27至0.55;I² = 28%;中等质量证据)。当分析限于近端DVT发生率时,我们发现了类似的降低(M-H OR 0.22,95% CI 0.10至0.47;I² = 0%;中等质量证据)。有症状VTE的发生率也从对照组的1.0%降至接受延长血栓预防的患者的0.1%,接近显著水平(M-H OR 0.30,95% CI 0.08至1.11;I² = 0%;中等质量证据)。对照组和LMWH组之间的出血发生率无差异,分别为2.8%和3.4%(M-H OR 1.10,95% CI 0.67至1.81;I² = 0%;中等质量证据)。对照组和LMWH组之间的死亡率无差异,分别为3.8%和3.9%(M-H OR 1.15,95% CI 0.72至1.84;中等质量证据)。根据分析,异质性估计在0%至28%之间,表明异质性较低或不重要。

作者结论

与仅在住院期间进行血栓预防相比

,使用LMWH进行延长血栓预防可显著降低VTE风险,且不会增加腹部或盆腔大手术后的出血并发症或死亡率。这一发现单独对于DVT以及近端和有症状DVT均成立。证据质量为中等,为常规使用延长血栓预防提供了中等支持。鉴于研究之间异质性较低以及VTE风险降低的证据一致且为中等,我们的发现表明额外的研究可能有助于细化风险降低程度,但不太可能显著影响这些发现。这篇更新的综述提供了额外证据并支持2009年综述中报告的先前结果。

相似文献

1
Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin for abdominal or pelvic surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Aug 26;8(8):CD004318. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004318.pub5.
2
Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin for abdominal or pelvic surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 27;3(3):CD004318. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004318.pub4.
3
Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin for abdominal or pelvic surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Nov 27;11(11):CD004318. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004318.pub3.
4
Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin for abdominal or pelvic surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21(1):CD004318. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004318.pub2.
5
Pentasaccharides for the prevention of venous thromboembolism.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 31;10(10):CD005134. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005134.pub3.
7
Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Dec 18;12(12):CD008500. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008500.pub5.
8
Interventions for preventing venous thromboembolism in adults undergoing knee arthroscopy.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 May 6;5(5):CD005259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005259.pub4.
9
Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for women at risk during pregnancy and the early postnatal period.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 29;3(3):CD001689. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001689.pub4.
10
Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 1;12(12):CD008500. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008500.pub4.

引用本文的文献

3
Standard- versus extended-duration anticoagulation for primary venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Dec 4;12(12):CD014541. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014541.pub2.
5
SEOM clinical guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and cancer (2023).
Clin Transl Oncol. 2024 Nov;26(11):2877-2901. doi: 10.1007/s12094-024-03605-2. Epub 2024 Aug 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Implementation of a Comprehensive Post-Discharge Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Program for Abdominal and Pelvic Surgery Patients.
J Am Coll Surg. 2016 Dec;223(6):804-813. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.09.010. Epub 2016 Sep 28.
2
Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolic Disease, Version 1.2015.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2015 Sep;13(9):1079-95. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2015.0133.
3
Effectiveness and safety of expanded perioperative thromboprophylaxis in complex gynecologic surgery.
Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Sep;138(3):501-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.07.017. Epub 2015 Jul 14.
7
Is there a role for extended venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis in IBD?
Dis Colon Rectum. 2014 Apr;57(4):413-4. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000089.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验