dc.creatorValverde-Martinez, Sebastian
dc.creatorGonzalez-Rayo, Laura-Andrea
dc.creatorPadilla-Fernandez, Barbara
dc.creatorPereira-Bruno, Jorge
dc.creatorCoelho, Hugo
dc.creatorMontesino-Semper, Manuel
dc.creatorMüller-Arteaga, Carlos
dc.creatorAlvarez-Ossorio-Fernandez, Jose-Luis
dc.creatorMigliorini, Filippo
dc.creatorGarcia-Cenador, Maria-Begoña
dc.creatorLorenzo-Gomez, Maria-Fernanda
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-25T23:56:58Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-22T14:13:25Z
dc.date.available2020-05-25T23:56:58Z
dc.date.available2022-09-22T14:13:25Z
dc.date.created2020-05-25T23:56:58Z
dc.identifier257753
dc.identifierhttps://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/22574
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2019.04.023
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3436904
dc.description.abstractBackground and aim: Pulmonary thromboembolism is one of the most common causes of non-surgical death in patients following urological abdominopelvic surgery. Since the beginning of prophylaxis for venous thromboembolic disease, episodes of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary thromboembolism have decreased. Our objective is to analyse the prognosis factors of thromboembolic disease, the clinical variability in the use of pharmacological prophylaxis and the results of its application. Material and methods: Retrospective multicentric study of 610 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy between December 2013 and November 2014, in 7 general hospitals in Spain, Italy and Portugal. Patients were classified according to their baseline characteristics into thrombotic risk groups and haemorrhagic risk groups. The venous thromboembolic events that occurred in the different groups were analysed. Results: The average age was 65.22 years (48-78). The average body mass index was 26.7 and the average ASA risk 2.1. In all patients, early mobilization began in the first 24 hours. In 4.1% intermittent pneumatic compression was used and 84.6% received pharmacological prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparins. Only 3.4% used the combination of mechanical prophylaxis with pharmacological prophylaxis. We observed a decrease in the incidence of thromboembolic events in the patients who received pharmacological prophylaxis, with an absolute risk reduction of 6.8%. There was no increase in the risk of haemorrhage in the patients who received pharmacological prophylaxis. Conclusions: In this study on patients undergoing radical prostatectomy, there was no difference in haemorrhagic complications derived from the use of pharmacological prophylaxis for venous thromboembolic disease. Pharmacological prophylaxis reduces the risk of presenting a thromboembolic event in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy, although this risk is not associated with the approach technique. © 2019 Elsevier España, S.L.U.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherEdiciones Doyma, S.L.
dc.relationMedicina Clinica, ISSN:257753, Vol.154, No.4 (2020); pp. 113-118
dc.relationhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85068042947&doi=10.1016%2fj.medcli.2019.04.023&partnerID=40&md5=36c40c90b27ae4d8f0ea9c1e50df23a2
dc.relation118
dc.relationNo. 4
dc.relation113
dc.relationMedicina Clinica
dc.relationVol. 154
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsAbierto (Texto Completo)
dc.sourceinstname:Universidad del Rosario
dc.sourcereponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR
dc.titlePharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in radical prostatectomy
dc.typearticle


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución