Key result
Chemical prophylaxis showed a non-significant trend toward reducing the risk of venous thromboembolism in bone and soft-tissue sarcoma patients (2.4% vs. 9.1%, P=0.13).
Why the study?
What is the incidence and what are the risk factors for venous thromboembolism in bone and soft-tissue sarcoma patients undergoing surgical intervention?
Cohort (n=171)
What is the incidence and what are the risk factors for venous thromboembolism in bone and soft-tissue sarcoma patients undergoing surgical intervention?
Absolute Event Rate: 2.4% vs 9.1%
p-value: p=0.13
The incidence of VTE in sarcoma patients undergoing surgery is relatively low (4.1%), but chemotherapy significantly increases this risk, highlighting a specific high-risk subgroup.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study reviews incidence and risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in bone/soft-tissue sarcoma patients prior to the initiation of Surgical Care Improvement Program (SCIP) measures in October 2009. METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified 171 cases of bone (51) and soft-tissue (120) sarcoma. Data were extracted on demographics, histology, presence of metastasis at presentation, type of adjuvant therapy, and established risk factors for VTE. Risk factors and outcomes were analyzed using chi-square and logistic regression with the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: The rate of clinically diagnosed VTE was 4.1% (7/171). Only those patients undergoing chemotherapy were found to have a significantly increased risk of VTE (P = 0.04). Chemical prophylaxis showed a trend toward reduction in the risk of VTE (2.4% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.13). The number of individual patient prothrombotic risk factors showed a trend towards increased risk of VTE (P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: The current rate of 4.1% is at the lower end of the range of reported incidence for musculoskeletal oncology patients. Furthermore, VTE did not occur only in patients with hip/thigh sarcomas, as previously reported by some. The trend for reduced incidence with chemoprophylaxis favors prophylactic measures but requires further substantiation in larger studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Damron et al. (2011) conducted a cohort in Bone and soft-tissue sarcoma (n=171). Chemical prophylaxis vs. No chemical prophylaxis was evaluated on Clinically diagnosed venous thromboembolism (VTE) (p=0.13). Chemical prophylaxis showed a non-significant trend toward reducing the risk of venous thromboembolism in bone and soft-tissue sarcoma patients (2.4% vs. 9.1%, P=0.13).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: