Venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis is not supported following elective spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Q1 Medicine
Journal of spine surgery Pub Date : 2025-06-27 Epub Date: 2025-06-06 DOI:10.21037/jss-24-162
Aditya Muralidharan, Davin C Gong, Anthony N Baumann, Joshua D Piche, Kempland C Walley, Osama N Kashlan, Rakesh D Patel, Ilyas S Aleem
{"title":"Venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis is not supported following elective spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Aditya Muralidharan, Davin C Gong, Anthony N Baumann, Joshua D Piche, Kempland C Walley, Osama N Kashlan, Rakesh D Patel, Ilyas S Aleem","doi":"10.21037/jss-24-162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following spine surgery is not standardized. This study aims to compare the rates of VTE between patients receiving chemoprophylaxis <i>vs.</i> no chemoprophylaxis following elective spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":17131,"journal":{"name":"Journal of spine surgery","volume":"11 2","pages":"242-255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12226186/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of spine surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jss-24-162","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following spine surgery is not standardized. This study aims to compare the rates of VTE between patients receiving chemoprophylaxis vs. no chemoprophylaxis following elective spine surgery.

Methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusions: 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.

选择性脊柱手术后不支持静脉血栓栓塞化学预防:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:脊柱手术后静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)的药理学预防尚未标准化。本研究旨在比较选择性脊柱手术后接受化学预防与未接受化学预防的患者之间静脉血栓栓塞的发生率。方法:对可检索的电子数据库进行全面调查,以获取比较择期脊柱手术后静脉血栓栓塞化学预防与不化学预防的随机对照试验(rct)。两位作者使用推荐评估、发展和评价等级(GRADE)标准检查了研究的资格、偏倚风险和质量。对发生静脉血栓形成的风险进行了荟萃分析,包括深静脉血栓形成(DVT)和肺栓塞(PE)、显著出血和硬膜外血肿。结果:在评估了2666篇文章后,8篇rct最终被纳入分析。这些试验涉及1509例患者,其中1151例接受静脉血栓栓塞化学预防,358例未接受。两组间静脉血栓栓塞发生率差异无统计学意义[危险比(RR): 1.01;95%置信区间(CI): 0.97, 1.05;P=0.68]或DVT (RR: 1.03;95% ci: 0.99, 1.06;P = 0.11)。此外,两组发生严重出血的风险无显著差异(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)。结论:本系统评价和荟萃分析没有发现选择性脊柱手术后常规使用静脉血栓栓塞化学预防的疗效有统计学上的显著差异,证据质量中等。未来仍需要精心设计的随机试验来评估静脉血栓栓塞化学预防的安全性和有效性,特别是考虑到选择性脊柱手术手术技术的可变性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of spine surgery
Journal of spine surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信