English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Objective  Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant concern post total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, the optimal prevention method of VTE remains controversial at present. This study aims to evaluate a risk‐stratified VTE prophylaxis protocol for patients undergoing TJA.    Methods  A total of 891 TJA patients from January 2011 to November 2019 were retrospectively investigated. The study was divided into two cohorts. In cohort 1, 410 patients (250 females and 160 males, mean age 64.32 years) were treated with an aggressive VTE chemoprophylaxis protocol. In cohort 2, 481 patients were treated with a risk‐stratified protocol that utilized low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) and sequential aspirin (ASA) for standard‐risk patients (a total of 288 containing 177 females and 111 males, mean age 65.4 years), and targeted anticoagulation for high‐risk patients (a total of 193 containing 121 females and 72 males, mean age 66.8 years). The patients were followed up at 2–4 weeks for an initial visit and at 6–10 weeks for a subsequent visit after surgery. A chart review of all patient medical records was performed to record the demographics, comorbidities, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolus, superficial infection, deep infection, bleeding complications, and 90‐day readmissions.    Results  The VTE rate was 1.71% (7/410) in cohort 1 and 1.46% (7/481) in cohort 2 respectively. For cohort 2, the VTE rate was 2.07% (4/193) in high‐risk group and 1.04% (3/288) in standard‐risk group. The readmission rate was 2.44% (10/410) in cohort 1 and 2.08% (10/481) in cohort 2. For cohort 2, the readmission rate was 2.07% (4/193) in high‐risk group and 2.08% (6/288) in standard‐risk group. The reasons for readmission were as follows: infection, 1.3% (5/410) in cohort 1 and 1.3% (6/481) in cohort 2; wound or bleeding complications, 0.48% (2/410) in cohort 1 and 0.2% (1/481) in cohort 2; trauma, 0.2% (1/410) in cohort 1 and 0.2% (1/481) in cohort 2; VTE, 0.2% (1/410) in cohort 1 and 0.2% (1/481) in cohort 2; others, 0.2% (1/410) in cohort 1 and 0.6% (3/481) in cohort 2. There was a decrease in VTE events and readmissions in the risk‐stratified cohort, although this did not reach statistical significance. However, it was found that there was a significant reduction in costs ( P  < 0.001) with the use of LMWH/ASA, when compared with aggressive anticoagulation agents in the risk‐stratified cohort.    Conclusion  The use of LMWH/ASA in a risk‐stratified TJA population is a safe and cost‐effective method of VTE prophylaxis.

orthopaedic surgery

Risk‐Stratified Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis after Total Joint Arthroplasty: Low Molecular Weight Heparins and Sequential Aspirin  vs  Aggressive Chemoprophylaxis