You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 131 No. 5, May 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  PAPERS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Prospective Surveillance for Perioperative Venous Thrombosis

Experience in 2643 Patients

William R. Flinn, MD; Gail P. Sandager, RN, RVT; Michael B. Silva, Jr, MD; Marshall E. Benjamin, MD; Leonard J. Cerullo, MD; Mary Taylor, RN

Arch Surg. 1996;131(5):472-480.


Abstract

Background
Patients who undergo neurosurgical procedures are at high risk for perioperative deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), which have been reported in 6% to 43% of these patients.

Objectives
To (1) determine the utility of prospective DVT surveillance in patients who undergo neurosurgical procedures by using venous duplex ultrasound scanning (VDUS), (2) assess the efficacy of DVT prophylaxis (elastic stockings and intermittent pneumatic compression), (3) identify subgroups of patients who are at higher risk, and (4) determine whether DVT surveillance would reduce the incidence of fatal PE.

Design
All patients had undergone preoperative VDUS of both lower extremities, and postoperative VDUS was performed on days 3 and 7, and weekly thereafter until patients were ambulatory or discharged.

Patients
During a 5-year period, 2643 patients who underwent neurosurgical procedures were enrolled in prospective DVT surveillance.

Setting
University-affiliated community hospital.

Results
Acute DVT was diagnosed in 147 (5.6%) of the 2643 patients. Eighty-one percent of the patients with acute DVT were asymptomatic at the time of diagnosis. Deep vein thrombosis developed de novo in the proximal veins in 98% of the patients. Patients in whom a craniotomy was done had a significantly higher risk for DVT (7.7%, P=.006), and patients who underwent cervical or lumbar spinal surgical procedures had a significantly lower risk (1.5%, P<.001). Among those patients in whom a craniotomy was performed for treatment of a tumor and who had DVT, 87% had malignant neoplasms. Significant lower-extremity neuromotor dysfunction was present in 69% of all patients with DVT, and this finding predominated among patients with DVT in the subgroups with a lower risk. A PE was diagnosed in 5 patients (0.19%) while they were hospitalized, and a PE was fatal in 2 (0.07% of all patients).

Conclusions
Most perioperative DVTs were clinically silent and formed spontaneously in proximal venous segments where there would be a risk for a PE. The overall incidence of DVT (5.6%) was low, suggesting effective DVT prophylaxis. Patients who underwent spinal surgical procedures were at a significantly lower risk for DVT, and future surveillance is not indicated in this patient group unless other conditions exist (paralysis, malignancy). Patients in whom a craniotomy was performed had a significantly higher risk of DVT, particularly when other risk factors existed. The low incidence of a fatal PE (0.07%) reflected that early detection and treatment of proximal DVT were facilitated by prospective VDUS surveillance in these patients.

(Arch Surg. 1996;131:472-480)



Author Affiliations

From the Divisions of Vascular Surgery, Departments of Surgery, University of Maryland Medical School, Baltimore (Dr Flinn and Ms Sandager), and University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark (Dr Silva); the Department of General Surgery, Bowman Gray Medical School, Winston-Salem, NC (Dr Benjamin); and The Chicago Neurosurgical Center, Columbus Hospital, Chicago, Ill (Dr Cerullo and Ms Taylor).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Incidence and Distribution of Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis in Rehabilitation Patients: Implications for Screening
Sachdev et al.
VASC ENDOVASCULAR SURG 2006;40:205-211.
ABSTRACT  

Prevention of venous thrombosis in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage
Lacut et al.
Neurology 2005;65:865-869.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: The Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy
Geerts et al.
Chest 2004;126:338S-400S.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Vena Cava Filters: Let's Not be "Blinded by Science"
Flinn
J Intensive Care Med 2003;18:105-107.
 

Deep Vein Thrombosis and Its Prevention in Critically Ill Adults
Attia et al.
Arch Intern Med 2001;161:1268-1279.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Bedside Insertion of the IVC Filter
Cheanvechai et al.
PERSPECT VASC SURG ENDOVASC THER 2001;14:21-35.
ABSTRACT  

Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism
Geerts et al.
Chest 2001;119 :132S-175S.
FULL TEXT  

A Randomized, Prospective Trial of Deep Venous Thrombosis Prophylaxis in Aortic Surgery
Killewich et al.
Arch Surg 1997;132:499-504.
ABSTRACT  

Prospective Surveillance for Perioperative Venous Thrombosis
Sharma et al.
Arch Surg 1997;132:212-212.
ABSTRACT  

Prospective Surveillance for Perioperative Venous Thrombosis-Reply
Flinn
Arch Surg 1997;132:212-213.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1996 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.