Kumar Dhirendra, Elhence Abhay, Rajnish Rajesh K, Gahlot Nitesh, Yadav Sandeep K, Gupta Saurabh, Kunal Kishor, Khera Phuspindra
Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, AIIMS Jodhpur, India.
Am J Transl Res. 2023 Aug 15;15(8):5284-5291. eCollection 2023.
Hip fractures, most common in the geriatric age group, can develop proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). There is no consensus regarding the ideal method or duration of prophylaxis, particularly in a trauma patient. This study bridges this lacuna in data by making a random comparison between mechanical prophylaxis alone vis-a-vis combined with mechanical and Enoxaparin-based chemoprophylaxis.
75 Elderly hip trauma patients from January 2019 to October 2020 at a single tertiary care center were randomly allocated into two groups using the sequentially numbered opaque sealed envelope method (SNOSE): one (n=44) receiving Enoxaparin and Mechanical prophylaxis and another (n=31) receiving Mechanical prophylaxis alone. All patients underwent CT (computed tomography) venography to screen for proximal DVT between days 5 to 10 of injury. The primary outcomes were the incidence of proximal DVT and pulmonary embolism (PE), and safety outcomes (wound complications and adverse systemic events) were recorded during the treatment.
No symptomatic or asymptomatic proximal DVT and death incidence was reported in either group. One case of pulmonary embolism was seen in the combined prophylaxis group. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding the above-mentioned parameters mentioned.
There is no significant difference in the incidence of proximal DVT between mechanical alone and combined chemical-mechanical prophylaxis in elderly patients sustaining hip trauma. The incidence of proximal DVT can be reduced by mechanical prophylaxis alone. It was efficacious and safer than combined mechanical and enoxaparin prophylaxis in preventing venous thromboembolism in elderly hip trauma patients.
髋部骨折在老年人群中最为常见,可并发近端深静脉血栓形成(DVT)。对于理想的预防方法或预防持续时间,目前尚无共识,尤其是在创伤患者中。本研究通过对单纯机械预防与机械预防联合依诺肝素化学预防进行随机比较,填补了这一数据空白。
2019年1月至2020年10月,在一家三级医疗中心对75例老年髋部创伤患者采用连续编号的不透明密封信封法(SNOSE)随机分为两组:一组(n = 44)接受依诺肝素和机械预防,另一组(n = 31)仅接受机械预防。所有患者在受伤后第5至10天接受CT(计算机断层扫描)静脉造影以筛查近端DVT。主要结局是近端DVT和肺栓塞(PE)的发生率,治疗期间记录安全结局(伤口并发症和不良全身事件)。
两组均未报告有症状或无症状的近端DVT及死亡发生率。联合预防组出现1例肺栓塞。两组在上述参数方面无显著差异。
老年髋部创伤患者单纯机械预防与化学 - 机械联合预防在近端DVT发生率上无显著差异。仅机械预防即可降低近端DVT的发生率。在预防老年髋部创伤患者静脉血栓栓塞方面,它比机械预防联合依诺肝素预防更有效且更安全。