A portable pneumatic compression device to prevent venous thromboembolism in orthopedic patients with the highest risks of both venous thrombosis and bleeding: A case series study

Purpose: There is a pressing need for safe venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in orthopedic patients with the highest risks of both venous thrombosis and bleeding. Portable intermittent pneumatic compression device (IPCD) has proven to be effective and safe in patients with a high risk of veno...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong) 2020-01, Vol.28 (1), p.2309499020905711
Hauptverfasser: Takahashi, Yoshiki, Takahira, Naonobu, Shibuya, Manaka, Uchiyama, Katsufumi, Fukushima, Kensuke, Iwase, Dai, Kawamura, Tadashi, Miyagi, Masayuki, Higashiyama, Reiji, Moriya, Mitsutoshi, Sakai, Kenta, Tsuda, Kouji, Sakamoto, Miki, Akamine, Akihiko, Takaso, Masashi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose: There is a pressing need for safe venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in orthopedic patients with the highest risks of both venous thrombosis and bleeding. Portable intermittent pneumatic compression device (IPCD) has proven to be effective and safe in patients with a high risk of venous thrombosis and low bleeding risk. Therefore, this study examined the effectiveness, safety, and wearing compliance of portable IPCD for postoperative VTE prophylaxis in patients with the highest risks of both venous thrombosis and bleeding. Methods: The cases consisted of 38 patients who had used a portable IPCD and had the highest risks of both venous thrombosis and bleeding. We examined the incidence of VTE to assess the effectiveness of the portable IPCD, the presence of hemorrhagic adverse events to assess safety, and the wearing rate to assess wearing compliance. Results: The incidences of asymptomatic and symptomatic deep vein thrombosis were 5.3% and 2.6%, respectively. The incidence of hemorrhagic adverse events was 21.1% in patients who received anticoagulants and wore an IPCD simultaneously and 0% in patients who wore an IPCD but did not receive anticoagulants. The wearing rate (i.e. ≥18 h/day) was 100%. Conclusion: Portable IPCD has the potential for safe VTE prophylaxis in patients at high risks for both venous thrombosis and bleeding. Therefore, we suggest that such patients use a portable IPCD for VTE prophylaxis.
ISSN:2309-4990
1022-5536
2309-4990
DOI:10.1177/2309499020905711