Venous thromboembolism in critically ill cirrhotic patients: practices of prophylaxis and incidence.

Thrombosis Pub Date : 2013-01-01 Epub Date: 2013-12-10 DOI:10.1155/2013/807526
Hasan M Al-Dorzi, Hani M Tamim, Abdulaziz S Aldawood, Yaseen M Arabi
{"title":"Venous thromboembolism in critically ill cirrhotic patients: practices of prophylaxis and incidence.","authors":"Hasan M Al-Dorzi,&nbsp;Hani M Tamim,&nbsp;Abdulaziz S Aldawood,&nbsp;Yaseen M Arabi","doi":"10.1155/2013/807526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objectives. We compared venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis practices and incidence in critically ill cirrhotic versus noncirrhotic patients and evaluated cirrhosis as a VTE risk factor. Methods. A cohort of 798 critically ill patients followed for the development of clinically detected VTE were categorized according to the diagnosis of cirrhosis. VTE prophylaxis practices and incidence were compared. Results. Seventy-five (9.4%) patients had cirrhosis with significantly higher INR (2.2 ± 0.9 versus 1.3 ± 0.6, P < 0.0001), lower platelet counts (115,000 ± 90,000 versus 258,000 ± 155,000/ μ L, P < 0.0001), and higher creatinine compared to noncirrhotic patients. Among cirrhotics, 31 patients received only mechanical prophylaxis, 24 received pharmacologic prophylaxis, and 20 did not have any prophylaxis. Cirrhotic patients were less likely to receive pharmacologic prophylaxis (odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.04-0.14). VTE occurred in only two (2.7%) cirrhotic patients compared to 7.6% in noncirrhotic patients (P = 0.11). The incidence rate was 2.2 events per 1000 patient-ICU days for cirrhotic patients and 3.6 events per 1000 patient-ICU days for noncirrhotics (incidence rate ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.15-2.52). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, cirrhosis was not associated with VTE risk (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.10-1.67). Conclusions. In critically ill cirrhotic patients, VTE incidence did not statistically differ from that in noncirrhotic patients. </p>","PeriodicalId":75222,"journal":{"name":"Thrombosis","volume":"2013 ","pages":"807526"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3872442/pdf/","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thrombosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/807526","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/12/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

Objectives. We compared venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis practices and incidence in critically ill cirrhotic versus noncirrhotic patients and evaluated cirrhosis as a VTE risk factor. Methods. A cohort of 798 critically ill patients followed for the development of clinically detected VTE were categorized according to the diagnosis of cirrhosis. VTE prophylaxis practices and incidence were compared. Results. Seventy-five (9.4%) patients had cirrhosis with significantly higher INR (2.2 ± 0.9 versus 1.3 ± 0.6, P < 0.0001), lower platelet counts (115,000 ± 90,000 versus 258,000 ± 155,000/ μ L, P < 0.0001), and higher creatinine compared to noncirrhotic patients. Among cirrhotics, 31 patients received only mechanical prophylaxis, 24 received pharmacologic prophylaxis, and 20 did not have any prophylaxis. Cirrhotic patients were less likely to receive pharmacologic prophylaxis (odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.04-0.14). VTE occurred in only two (2.7%) cirrhotic patients compared to 7.6% in noncirrhotic patients (P = 0.11). The incidence rate was 2.2 events per 1000 patient-ICU days for cirrhotic patients and 3.6 events per 1000 patient-ICU days for noncirrhotics (incidence rate ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.15-2.52). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, cirrhosis was not associated with VTE risk (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.10-1.67). Conclusions. In critically ill cirrhotic patients, VTE incidence did not statistically differ from that in noncirrhotic patients.

Abstract Image

重症肝硬化患者的静脉血栓栓塞:预防和发病率的实践。
目标。我们比较了重症肝硬化和非肝硬化患者静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)预防措施和发生率,并评估肝硬化作为静脉血栓栓塞的危险因素。方法。对798例临床检测到静脉血栓栓塞的危重患者进行随访,根据肝硬化的诊断进行分组。比较静脉血栓栓塞预防方法和发生率。结果。75例(9.4%)肝硬化患者INR显著升高(2.2±0.9 vs 1.3±0.6,P < 0.0001),血小板计数较低(11.5万±9万vs 25.8万±15.5万/ μ L, P < 0.0001),肌酐高于非肝硬化患者。在肝硬化患者中,31例患者仅接受机械预防,24例接受药物预防,20例未接受任何预防。肝硬化患者接受药物预防的可能性较小(优势比,0.08;95%置信区间(CI), 0.04-0.14)。静脉血栓栓塞仅发生在2例(2.7%)肝硬化患者中,而非肝硬化患者发生静脉血栓栓塞的比例为7.6% (P = 0.11)。肝硬化患者的发生率为每1000例患者- icu天2.2例事件,非肝硬化患者的发生率为每1000例患者- icu天3.6例事件(发病率比,0.61;95% ci, 0.15-2.52)。多因素Cox回归分析显示,肝硬化与静脉血栓栓塞风险无关(风险比0.40;95% ci, 0.10-1.67)。结论。危重型肝硬化患者的静脉血栓栓塞发生率与非肝硬化患者无统计学差异。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信