Cargando…

Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Background. Thromboembolic events are major causes of morbidity, and prevention is important. We aimed to compare chemical prophylaxis (CP) and mechanical prophylaxis (MP) as methods of prevention in nonsurgical patients on mechanical ventilation. Methods. We performed a retrospective study of adult...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gaspard, Dany, Vito, Karen, Schorr, Christa, Hunter, Krystal, Gerber, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4670688/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26682067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/849142
_version_ 1782404292817190912
author Gaspard, Dany
Vito, Karen
Schorr, Christa
Hunter, Krystal
Gerber, David
author_facet Gaspard, Dany
Vito, Karen
Schorr, Christa
Hunter, Krystal
Gerber, David
author_sort Gaspard, Dany
collection PubMed
description Background. Thromboembolic events are major causes of morbidity, and prevention is important. We aimed to compare chemical prophylaxis (CP) and mechanical prophylaxis (MP) as methods of prevention in nonsurgical patients on mechanical ventilation. Methods. We performed a retrospective study of adult patients admitted to the Cooper University Hospital ICU between 2002 and 2010. Patients on one modality of prophylaxis throughout their stay were included. The CP group comprised 329 patients and the MP group 419 patients. The primary outcome was incidence of thromboembolic events. Results. Acuity measured by APACHE II score was comparable between the two groups (p = 0.215). Univariate analysis showed 1 DVT/no PEs in the CP group and 12 DVTs/1 PE in the MP group (p = 0.005). Overall mortality was 34.3% and 50.6%, respectively. ICU LOS was similar. Hospital LOS was shorter in the MP group. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher incidence of events in the MP prophylaxis group (odds ratio 9.9). After excluding patients admitted for bleeding in both groups, repeat analysis showed again increased events in the MP group (odds ratio 2.9) but this result did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion. Chemical methods for DVT/PE prophylaxis seem superior to mechanical prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients on mechanical ventilation and should be used when possible.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4670688
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46706882015-12-17 Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients Gaspard, Dany Vito, Karen Schorr, Christa Hunter, Krystal Gerber, David Thrombosis Research Article Background. Thromboembolic events are major causes of morbidity, and prevention is important. We aimed to compare chemical prophylaxis (CP) and mechanical prophylaxis (MP) as methods of prevention in nonsurgical patients on mechanical ventilation. Methods. We performed a retrospective study of adult patients admitted to the Cooper University Hospital ICU between 2002 and 2010. Patients on one modality of prophylaxis throughout their stay were included. The CP group comprised 329 patients and the MP group 419 patients. The primary outcome was incidence of thromboembolic events. Results. Acuity measured by APACHE II score was comparable between the two groups (p = 0.215). Univariate analysis showed 1 DVT/no PEs in the CP group and 12 DVTs/1 PE in the MP group (p = 0.005). Overall mortality was 34.3% and 50.6%, respectively. ICU LOS was similar. Hospital LOS was shorter in the MP group. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher incidence of events in the MP prophylaxis group (odds ratio 9.9). After excluding patients admitted for bleeding in both groups, repeat analysis showed again increased events in the MP group (odds ratio 2.9) but this result did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion. Chemical methods for DVT/PE prophylaxis seem superior to mechanical prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients on mechanical ventilation and should be used when possible. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015 2015-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4670688/ /pubmed/26682067 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/849142 Text en Copyright © 2015 Dany Gaspard et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gaspard, Dany
Vito, Karen
Schorr, Christa
Hunter, Krystal
Gerber, David
Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients
title Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients
title_full Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients
title_fullStr Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients
title_short Comparison of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients
title_sort comparison of chemical and mechanical prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in nonsurgical mechanically ventilated patients
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4670688/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26682067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/849142
work_keys_str_mv AT gasparddany comparisonofchemicalandmechanicalprophylaxisofvenousthromboembolisminnonsurgicalmechanicallyventilatedpatients
AT vitokaren comparisonofchemicalandmechanicalprophylaxisofvenousthromboembolisminnonsurgicalmechanicallyventilatedpatients
AT schorrchrista comparisonofchemicalandmechanicalprophylaxisofvenousthromboembolisminnonsurgicalmechanicallyventilatedpatients
AT hunterkrystal comparisonofchemicalandmechanicalprophylaxisofvenousthromboembolisminnonsurgicalmechanicallyventilatedpatients
AT gerberdavid comparisonofchemicalandmechanicalprophylaxisofvenousthromboembolisminnonsurgicalmechanicallyventilatedpatients