Venous Thrombo-embolism prophylaxis: Intermittent pneumatic compression

Mehmet Kurtoglu, Emre Sivrikoz
{"title":"Venous Thrombo-embolism prophylaxis: Intermittent pneumatic compression","authors":"Mehmet Kurtoglu,&nbsp;Emre Sivrikoz","doi":"10.1016/j.rvm.2013.08.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the most preventable cause of hospital deaths in Europe. Autopsy-proven fatal pulmonary emboli were found in 2.5% of 200 hospitalized medical patients followed-up prospectively. The number of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE) related deaths throughout the Europe (543,454) is more than double the amount of deaths attributed to AIDS, breast cancer, </span>prostate cancer<span><span> and transport accidents combined (209,926). Only 58.5% of surgical patients and 39.5% of medical patients receive the appropriate thrombo-prophylaxis for their conditions. An ideal VTE prophylaxis for any given patient should be (1) risk adjusted, (2) targeted, (3) personalized and (4) effective. Intermittent pneumatic compression<span> (IPC) devices are best suited for: (1) ICU patients who are either bleeding or have a high bleeding risk; (2) low risk elective general abdominal or pelvic surgery patients; (3) high risk elective general abdominal or pelvic surgery patients who have a high bleeding risk. In high risk elective general abdominal or pelvic surgery patients who are not at high risk for major bleeding, combined prophylaxis (IPC+LMWH) are recommended. Combined modalities target virtually all aspects of the Virchow's triad<span><span>: (1) IPC and stockings prevent “stasis”, (2) stockings prevent “endothelial damage”, (3) IPC increases fibrinolysis, and </span>LMWH exert anti-thrombotic effects to prevent “hypercoagulability”. </span></span></span>In patients undergoing major surgery, IPC devices have a broader area of application due to fewer contra-indications and similar efficacy as compared to LMWH. Whenever indicated, every effort should be undertaken to provide a combined prophylaxis method.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":101091,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Vascular Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rvm.2013.08.005","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews in Vascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212021113000349","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the most preventable cause of hospital deaths in Europe. Autopsy-proven fatal pulmonary emboli were found in 2.5% of 200 hospitalized medical patients followed-up prospectively. The number of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE) related deaths throughout the Europe (543,454) is more than double the amount of deaths attributed to AIDS, breast cancer, prostate cancer and transport accidents combined (209,926). Only 58.5% of surgical patients and 39.5% of medical patients receive the appropriate thrombo-prophylaxis for their conditions. An ideal VTE prophylaxis for any given patient should be (1) risk adjusted, (2) targeted, (3) personalized and (4) effective. Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices are best suited for: (1) ICU patients who are either bleeding or have a high bleeding risk; (2) low risk elective general abdominal or pelvic surgery patients; (3) high risk elective general abdominal or pelvic surgery patients who have a high bleeding risk. In high risk elective general abdominal or pelvic surgery patients who are not at high risk for major bleeding, combined prophylaxis (IPC+LMWH) are recommended. Combined modalities target virtually all aspects of the Virchow's triad: (1) IPC and stockings prevent “stasis”, (2) stockings prevent “endothelial damage”, (3) IPC increases fibrinolysis, and LMWH exert anti-thrombotic effects to prevent “hypercoagulability”. In patients undergoing major surgery, IPC devices have a broader area of application due to fewer contra-indications and similar efficacy as compared to LMWH. Whenever indicated, every effort should be undertaken to provide a combined prophylaxis method.

静脉血栓栓塞预防:间歇气动压缩
肺栓塞(PE)是欧洲最可预防的医院死亡原因。前瞻性随访的200例住院患者中,尸检证实的致死性肺栓塞发生率为2.5%。在整个欧洲,与静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)相关的死亡人数(543,454人)是艾滋病、乳腺癌、前列腺癌和交通事故死亡人数总和(209,926人)的两倍多。只有58.5%的外科患者和39.5%的内科患者接受了相应的血栓预防治疗。对于任何患者,理想的静脉血栓栓塞预防应该(1)调整风险,(2)有针对性,(3)个性化,(4)有效。间歇气动压缩(IPC)装置最适合:(1)ICU出血或出血风险高的患者;(2)低风险选择性一般腹部或盆腔手术患者;(3)高危选择性一般腹部或盆腔手术患者出血风险高。对于不存在大出血高风险的高危选择性一般腹部或骨盆手术患者,建议采用联合预防(IPC+低分子肝素)。联合治疗几乎针对Virchow's triad的所有方面:(1)IPC和丝袜预防“瘀”,(2)丝袜预防“内皮损伤”,(3)IPC增加纤维蛋白溶解,低分子肝素发挥抗血栓作用以防止“高凝”。在接受大手术的患者中,IPC器械由于禁忌症较少,与低分子肝素相比具有相似的疗效,具有更广泛的应用领域。无论何时指出,应尽一切努力提供一种联合预防方法。
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