Why the study?
Despite advances in robotic-assisted prostatectomy and enhanced rehabilitation protocols, approximately 20% of patients still experience complications, most frequently hemorrhagic, prompting evaluation of the effect of discontinuing systematic pharmacologic anticoagulant prophylaxis.
Does systematic pharmacologic anticoagulant prophylaxis increase hemorrhagic complications or reduce thrombotic events in patients undergoing robotic-assisted prostatectomy?
Does systematic pharmacologic anticoagulant prophylaxis increase hemorrhagic complications or reduce thrombotic events in patients undergoing robotic-assisted prostatectomy?
Routine pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after robotic-assisted prostatectomy increases bleeding risk without reducing thrombotic events, supporting a risk-adapted, individualized approach.
Anticoagulation was associated with higher bleeding without thrombotic benefit after robotic prostatectomy; leaves open need for RCTs to guide risk-adapted prophylaxis.
BACKGROUND: Despite advances in robotic-assisted prostatectomy and enhanced postoperative rehabilitation protocols, approximately 20% of patients still experience complications - most frequently hemorrhagic. To evaluate the effect of discontinuing systematic PAP (pharmacologic anticoagulant prophylaxis) on postoperative complications - specifically hemorrhagic and thrombotic events - after robotic-assisted prostatectomy. METHODS: In this retrospective before-and-after study, 361 consecutive patients undergoing prostatectomy at a single center were included. Group I (n=173) received systematic PAP with low molecular weight heparin for 28 days postoperatively, alongside routine physical prophylaxis (early mobilization, adequate hydration, and intraoperative leg compression). Group II (n=188) received only routine physical prophylaxis. The primary endpoints were hemorrhagic and thrombotic complications. RESULTS: Clavien-Dindo≥II complications were significantly more frequent in Group I (20.2%) compared to Group II (12.2%, P<0.05). Hemorrhagic complications occurred in 10% of patients overall, with a significantly higher rate in Group I (15.0% vs. 3.7%, P<0.05). Thrombotic events were rare in both groups and not statistically different 2.3% vs. 3.7% (P=0.3). Thrombotic risk did not show a statistically significant difference in adjusted models with propensity score methods. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggest that systematic anticoagulation may increase hemorrhagic morbidity without a clear thrombotic benefit. These findings support a risk-adapted, individualized approach rather than routine pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alice et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: