Key result
Routine use of potent anticoagulation following total joint replacement does not reduce overall mortality or the proportion of deaths due to pulmonary embolism.
Why the study?
Do different thromboprophylaxis regimens affect post-operative mortality and cause of death in patients undergoing total joint replacement?
Meta-Analysis (n=99,441)
Yes
Do different thromboprophylaxis regimens affect post-operative mortality and cause of death in patients undergoing total joint replacement?
In patients undergoing total joint replacement, routine potent anticoagulation does not reduce overall mortality or PE-related deaths compared to other regimens, while cardiopulmonary events remain the leading cause of death.
Questions routine potent anticoagulation after total joint replacement; challenges prevailing PE-focused prophylaxis assumptions.
We performed a meta-analysis of modern total joint replacement (TJR) to determine the post-operative mortality and the cause of death using different thromboprophylactic regimens as follows: 1) no routine chemothromboprophylaxis (NRC); 2) Potent anticoagulation (PA) (unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin, ximelagatran, fondaparinux or rivaroxaban); 3) Potent anticoagulation combined (PAC) with regional anaesthesia and/or pneumatic compression devices (PCDs); 4) Warfarin (W); 5) Warfarin combined (WAC) with regional anaesthesia and/or PCD; and 6) Multimodal (MM) prophylaxis, including regional anaesthesia, PCDs and aspirin in low-risk patients. Cause of death was classified as autopsy proven, clinically certain or unknown. Deaths were grouped into cardiopulmonary excluding pulmonary embolism (PE), PE, bleeding-related, gastrointestinal, central nervous system, and others (miscellaneous). Meta-analysis based on fixed effects or random effects models was used for pooling incidence data. In all, 70 studies were included (99 441 patients; 373 deaths). The mortality was lowest in the MM (0.2%) and WC (0.2%) groups. The most frequent cause of death was cardiopulmonary (47.9%), followed by PE (25.4%) and bleeding (8.9%). The proportion of deaths due to PE was not significantly affected by the thromboprophylaxis regimen (PA, 35.5%; PAC, 28%; MM, 23.2%; and NRC, 16.3%). Fatal bleeding was higher in groups relying on the use of anticoagulation (W, 33.8%; PA, 9.4%; PAC, 10.8%) but the differences were not statistically significant. Our study demonstrated that the routine use of PA does not reduce the overall mortality or the proportion of deaths due to PE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Poultsides et al. (2012) conducted a meta-analysis in Total joint replacement (n=99,441). Potent anticoagulation vs. Other thromboprophylaxis regimens or no routine chemothromboprophylaxis was evaluated on Post-operative mortality and cause of death. Routine use of potent anticoagulation following total joint replacement does not reduce overall mortality or the proportion of deaths due to pulmonary embolism.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: