View clinical trials related to Thromboembolism.
Filter by:Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of death among hospitalized patients, and is an important patient safety issue in plastic surgery. Previous work has shown that enoxaparin prophylaxis can prevent many post-operative VTE events, and current American Society of Plastic Surgeons guidelines support enoxaparin prophylaxis for high-risk patients. Highest risk patients often have cancer or trauma reconstruction. Primary outcomes include 1) peak and trough steady-state aFXa levels in response to standard and escalated doses of enoxaparin and 2) the proportion of patients with appropriate aFXa levels pre and post initiation of a clinical protocol for enoxaparin dose adjustment. The investigators expect that standard dosing will result in inadequate aFXa peak and trough levels, and that the clinical dose adjustment protocol will significantly improve the proportion of in-range aFXa levels. The investigators will also develop a linear regression-based equation to calculate, based on patient-level factors, the required dose of enoxaparin to generate in-range aFXa levels. This research may show that the current "one size fits all" approach to enoxaparin prophylaxis is insufficient. In the trauma and orthopaedic populations, patients with low initial aFXa levels are significantly more likely to develop deep venous thrombosis. Thus, this study has important implications for appropriate enoxaparin dose magnitude and frequency, and may ultimately help to decrease the substantial morbidity and mortality associated with post-operative VTE.
To investigate whether preemptive analgesic of femoral nerve block could prevent deep venous thromboembolism due to inhibiting the excessive release of neutrophil elastase and inflammatory cytokines.
Patients with cancer hospitalized for an acute medical illness have an increased risk of venous thromboembolic events. Although international guidelines suggest the use of thromboprophylaxis in these patients, the recommendations are based on studies which included a percentage of patients with cancer without primarily focusing on this high risk group. Since patients with cancer present an increased risk of bleeding complications it is critical to evaluate the safety of thromboprophylaxis in the cancer group. Recent studies suggest a limited use of thromboprophylaxis in these patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the use, efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis in medical cancer patients hospitalized for an acute medical disease. Design: observational, prospective study Primary end-point: incidence of major and clinically relevant non major bleeding during hospitalization Secondary endpoints: frequency of use, doses and contraindications for pharmacological thromboprophylaxis; venous thromboembolic events up to three months after discharge
The investigators have recently developed a registry of missed doses of VTE prophylaxis that includes retrospective data on missed doses of VTE prophylaxis. To decrease rates of VTE prophylaxis refusal, the group has developed a patient-centered education bundle that will be delivered as an in-person, 1-on-1 discussion session with a nurse educator. Supporting education materials include a 2-page education sheet and an educational video. The investigators hypothesize that patient refusal of VTE prophylaxis is associated with significant knowledge gaps among patients regarding patients' risk of developing VTE and the benefits of VTE prophylaxis and that delivering an education bundle to patients that refuse VTE prophylaxis will improve compliance with VTE prophylaxis and decrease rates of VTE.
The purpose of this study is to determine if the addition of antiplatelet therapy (i.e. aspirin) to low-molecular-weight-heparin (i.e. enoxaparin) will decrease the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in high-risk critically injured patients. The investigators further aim to determine the safety and efficacy of dual thromboprophylaxis with aspirin and enoxaparin for decreasing the incidence of VTE after trauma.
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent condition, affecting 1.8 per 1,000 people every year. Admission to hospital is one of the main risk factors for VTE, and could account for up to 20% of all VTE, making VTE prevention in admitted patients an appealing option to reduce VTE global burden. The landmark MEDENOX trial and others demonstrated the efficacy of low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) in reducing a composite outcome of symptomatic and asymptomatic events, the latter accounting for the vast majority of events. Publication of these trials led to the implementation of thromboprophylaxis policies in hospitals, which acceptance has been variable. More recently, the use of thromboprophylaxis has been challenged after the publication of 1) a negative trial that used 'death from any cause' as main outcome, 2) a systematic review showing the lack of a clear efficacy on the risk of pulmonary embolism or death, 3) negative trials using new oral anticoagulants, 4) the last version of the American College of Chest Physicians Guidelines, focusing on symptomatic events only, downgraded its recommendation for thromboprophylaxis in medical patients to a 1B recommendation, restricting its use to patients 'at increased risk of thrombosis' and recommending against the use of thromboprophylaxis in patients at low risk of thrombosis, patients bleeding or at high risk of bleeding. However, a limitation of this interpretation of the data is that in most trials, patients with screened asymptomatic events were treated with anticoagulants, preventing the occurrence of symptomatic events during follow-up. Moreover, subgroup analyses showed that elderly patients were at high risk of thrombosis in these trials, and that LMWH could be particularly efficient in this subgroup of patients. Conversely, their risk of bleeding is also higher than in younger patients and the current trials were not powered to detect a difference in the bleeding risk between groups. Finally, the diagnostic and therapeutic management of VTE is more challenging in the elderly. Therefore, we planned a randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of LMWH for the prevention of symptomatic VTE in elderly patients.
Warfarin is an anticoagulant medication that is highly effective at preventing clotting disorders but which has a narrow therapeutic window. If warfarin is under effective patients are at risk of stroke, if it is over effective patients are at risk of bleeding complications. Physicians routinely and regularly measure a blood test (called the "INR") that determines the effectiveness of warfarin and have a range of test values (the "therapeutic range") in which they try to keep the patient. By convention warfarin is taken at dinnertime, however this is the same time of day that highly variable consumption of dietary vitamin K occurs (found largely in green leafy vegetables) and vitamin K alters the effectiveness of warfarin. Given vitamin K has a very short half-life (i.e. it is only active for a short period of time after it is ingested) it may make more sense to take warfarin in the morning (when very little vitamin K is ingested) to produce a more consistent drug effect. The purpose of this study is to determine whether switching current warfarin users from evening to morning dosing decreases time spent outside the therapeutic INR range.
The study will evaluate the incidence of major bleeding (including clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding) events in women undergoing surgery for gynecologic cancer with apixaban 2.5 mg twice a day (BID) compared to current standard of care, subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once a day (QD) for 28 days post surgery.
The risk of developing a blood clot occurs in up to 60% of all critical care patients. Many times enoxaparin (or Lovenox) is given to patients who are at a higher risk of developing clots in their legs or lungs. There are two standard doses of enoxaparin that are recommended by the drug companies. These two doses have never been directly compared in trauma, general, and vascular surgery patients. The purposes of this study are: 1. to compare the development of blood clots in patients receiving 30mg twice daily of enoxaparin compared to patients receiving 40mg once daily of enoxaparin. 2. to determine if there is higher risk of bleeding complications in patients receiving 30mg twice daily of enoxaparin compared to patients receiving 40mg once daily. Patients enrolled into the study will be randomized to receive enoxaparin, 30mg twice daily or enoxaparin, 40mg once daily. Patients will then be monitored for signs and symptoms of blood clots. At the time of discharge (or before, if medically indicated), an ultrasound test will be performed to look for blood clots in the patient's legs. The investigators will compare incidence of blood clots formed between the 2 groups of patients to determine if one dose of enoxaparin relates to a lower rate of blood clots in critically ill patients. The investigators will also compare the incidence of bleeding complications between the 2 groups.
After any surgery, there is a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) in the major veins of the legs and Pulmonary Embolus (PE) in the lungs. These clots are usually prevented by the administration of low-molecular-weight heparin, a blood thinner that prevents clotting. In most surgical specialties like thoracic or vascular surgery, this treatment is used until patients are discharged from the hospital. However, in orthopaedic surgery, there is strong evidence that longer term preventative treatment up to 35 days after hospital discharge helps to reduce VTE occurrences. In thoracic surgery, there is an even greater risk of developing PE because of the surgical stress, the common presence of cancer and direct damage to blood vessels in the lung during surgery. Despite the potential utility, the use of extended VTE prevention has never been evaluated in the thoracic surgery population. If extended treatment prevents clots, more patients will avoid complications related to VTE. There is currently very limited information available on the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients undergoing lung cancer resection and the utility of extended thromboprophylaxis (ET) in this patient population. Furthermore, in contrast to patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery where ET has become standard of care, duration of thromboprophylaxis is not well defined in this patient population. Therefore, there is a clear need to systematically evaluate the effects of extended VTE prophylaxis on the incidence of VTE in the post-op population.