Key result
Compared with no prevention, the administration of chemical or mechanical preventative therapies to CABG patients did not significantly lower the risk of VTE within 6 weeks (P=NS).
Why the study?
Does mechanical or chemical preventative therapy reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery?
Population
92,699 patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery between 2004 and 2008
Comparison
Mechanical preventative therapy, subcutaneous… vs No preventative therapy
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6 weeks
Authors
Loading...
Does not support routine VTE prophylaxis after CABG; leaves open whether RCTs would detect benefit in higher-risk subgroups.
Cohort (n=92,699)
Does mechanical or chemical preventative therapy reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery?
p-value: p=NS
In patients undergoing CABG, the routine use of mechanical or chemical VTE prophylaxis does not significantly reduce the already low risk of VTE compared to no prophylaxis.
Kulik et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Venous thromboembolism after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (n=92,699). Chemical or mechanical preventative therapies vs. No preventative therapy was evaluated on Incidence of VTE within 6 weeks of CABG (p=NS). Compared with no prevention, the administration of chemical or mechanical preventative therapies to CABG patients did not significantly lower the risk of VTE within 6 weeks (P=NS).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: