Muralidharan Aditya, Gong Davin C, Baumann Anthony N, Piche Joshua D, Walley Kempland C, Kashlan Osama N, Patel Rakesh D, Aleem Ilyas S
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
College of Medicine, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, USA.
J Spine Surg. 2025 Jun 27;11(2):242-255. doi: 10.21037/jss-24-162. Epub 2025 Jun 6.
Pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following spine surgery is not standardized. This study aims to compare the rates of VTE between patients receiving chemoprophylaxis no chemoprophylaxis following elective spine surgery.
A comprehensive investigation of searchable electronic databases was performed to capture randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VTE chemoprophylaxis with no chemoprophylaxis after elective spine surgery. Two authors examined the eligibility, risk of bias and quality of studies using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Meta-analyses were conducted for risk of developing VTE, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), significant bleeding, and epidural hematoma.
After appraising 2,666 articles, eight RCTs were ultimately included in the analysis. These trials involved 1,509 patients, with 1,151 receiving VTE chemoprophylaxis and 358 not receiving it. No significant differences were found between the groups in the incidence of VTE [risk ratio (RR): 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97, 1.05; P=0.68] or DVT (RR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.06; P=0.11). Additionally, there were no significant differences in the risk of severe bleeding (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.05; P=0.59), significant bleeding (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.04; P=0.75), PE (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.96, 1.03; P=0.81), or epidural hematoma (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.03; P>0.99) between the groups.
This systematic review and meta-analysis did not find a statistically significant difference in the efficacy of routine use of VTE chemoprophylaxis following elective spine surgery with moderate-quality evidence. Future well-designed randomized trials with adequate power are still needed to assess the safety and efficacy of VTE chemoprophylaxis, especially considering the variability of surgical techniques in elective spine surgery.
脊柱手术后的药物性静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE)预防措施尚未标准化。本研究旨在比较择期脊柱手术后接受化学预防与未接受化学预防的患者之间的VTE发生率。
对可检索的电子数据库进行全面检索,以获取比较择期脊柱手术后VTE化学预防与不预防的随机对照试验(RCT)。两名作者使用推荐评估、制定和评价分级(GRADE)标准检查研究的纳入资格、偏倚风险和质量。对发生VTE的风险进行荟萃分析,包括深静脉血栓形成(DVT)和肺栓塞(PE)、严重出血和硬膜外血肿。
在评估了2666篇文章后,最终有8项RCT纳入分析。这些试验涉及1509例患者,其中1151例接受VTE化学预防,358例未接受。两组之间在VTE发生率[风险比(RR):1.01;95%置信区间(CI):0.97,1.05;P=0.68]或DVT发生率(RR:1.03;95%CI:0.99,1.06;P=0.11)方面未发现显著差异。此外,两组之间在严重出血风险(RR:1.01;95%CI:0.97,1.05;P=0.59)、显著出血(RR:1.01;95%CI:0.97,1.04;P=0.75)、PE(RR:1.00;95%CI:0.96,1.03;P=0.81)或硬膜外血肿(RR:1.00;95%CI:0.97,1.03;P>0.99)方面也未发现显著差异。
本系统评价和荟萃分析未发现中等质量证据表明择期脊柱手术后常规使用VTE化学预防的疗效存在统计学显著差异。未来仍需要设计良好且有足够效力的随机试验来评估VTE化学预防的安全性和有效性,特别是考虑到择期脊柱手术中手术技术的变异性。