Why the study?
What is the current practice and rate of thrombotic events for thrombosis prophylaxis in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy in Hungary?
What is the current practice and rate of thrombotic events for thrombosis prophylaxis in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy in Hungary?
Thrombosis prophylaxis practices for radical prostatectomy in Hungary are not unified, highlighting the need for standardized urological guidelines.
Variable prophylaxis adjuncts despite universal LMWH use yield low event rates; leaves open whether standardization improves outcomes in radical prostatectomy.
Venous thromboembolism is a possible fatal complication after pelvic surgery. There is a lack of trials assessing the effect of prophylactic measures in urology. The aim of the study was to evaluate the practice of thrombosis prophylaxis in a Central European country. A questionnaire of performed radical prostatectomies, way of thrombosis prophylaxis and number of experienced thrombotic events was posted to all departments of urology in Hungary. With a response rate of 59%, 506 radical prostatectomies were reported. Low molecular weight heparin was administered by 100% of the departments. Graduated support stockings were applied by 37% of the patients. Early mobilization was the most common form of mechanic prophylaxis (57%). Thrombotic events were experienced in 1.4%, 0.2% were fatal. The thrombosis prophylaxis of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy is not unified. Due to the potential mortality of thrombotic complications it should be evaluated and prophylaxis should be recommended in urological guidelines.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Benyó et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: