Turkish neurosurgery · 2015
Vena Cava Filters are not Superior to Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis: A Study on Long-Term Immobilized Neurosurgical Patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Akmangit Ilkay, Daglioglu Ergun, Uyanik Sadik Ahmet, Ahlat Baris, Alagoz Fatih, Ekici Ibrahim, Dede Dogan, Belen Ahmet Deniz
Аннотация
AIM: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) are the most frequent surgical problems and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Neurosurgical patients constitute a unique group where prophylaxis with anticoagulant and antiaggregant agents are relatively contraindicated due to the natural course of vascular problems such as aneurysms, hemorrhagic tumors or hematomas or increased vulnerability to complex spinal surgeries and trauma.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included 67 patients predicted to be immobilized for 2 or more months in this retrospective analysis. A vena cava filter was inserted between the first and seventh postoperative day in 40 patients in a prophylactic manner whereas 27 patients received low dose heparin for the same purpose. The patients were evaluated for symptomatic DVT or PE.
RESULTS: Percutaneous insertion was performed for all filters without any complication. DVT occurred in two patients of the filter group and 1 patient of the heparin group. There was no PE recorded in any patient of either group. Patients were followed up for 22 months in the filter and 16 months in the heparin group.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that prophylactic filter use in high risk neurosurgical patients is not beneficial and not superior to low-molecular-weight heparin use. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to prevent PE in patients with proven DVT who have no contraindication for anticoagulant drugs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included 67 patients predicted to be immobilized for 2 or more months in this retrospective analysis. A vena cava filter was inserted between the first and seventh postoperative day in 40 patients in a prophylactic manner whereas 27 patients received low dose heparin for the same purpose. The patients were evaluated for symptomatic DVT or PE.
RESULTS: Percutaneous insertion was performed for all filters without any complication. DVT occurred in two patients of the filter group and 1 patient of the heparin group. There was no PE recorded in any patient of either group. Patients were followed up for 22 months in the filter and 16 months in the heparin group.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that prophylactic filter use in high risk neurosurgical patients is not beneficial and not superior to low-molecular-weight heparin use. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to prevent PE in patients with proven DVT who have no contraindication for anticoagulant drugs.