ABSTRACT
AIM OF THE STUDY: Thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients during hospitalization reduces the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: To assess the underuse and the overuse of thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients at a tertiary oncology department, we retrospectively analyzed 1983 consecutive hospitalizations of 498 cancer patients who received chemotherapy from October 2016 to May 2017. The Padua prediction score (≥ 4 points) and Caprini risk assessment (≥ 5 points) were used to identify patients at high risk of VTE. RESULTS: The majority of individuals (n = 363, 72.9%) suffered from advanced lung cancer. We found that 419 (84.14%) patients received thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin 40 mg qd,including 181 (43.2%) individuals using concomitant mechanical thromboprophylaxis. As few as 44 (8.8%) and 11 (2.2%) patients did not receive thromboprophylaxis despite high VTE risk based on the Caprini risk assessment and Padua prediction score, respectively (p < 0.001). The number of patients without high risk of VTE, who received pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, was higher when the Padua prediction score was used compared with the Caprini risk assessment (n = 391 [78.5%] vs. n = 210 [42.2%], respectively; p < 0.001). Three patients (0.6%) experienced vascular events during hospital stay, including one symptomatic deep vein thrombosis. No major bleeding was observed. Predictors of thromboprophylaxis overuse were as follows: previous VTE and abnormal pulmonary function for both scales. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that thromboprophylaxis in cancer in patients undergoing chemotherapy is suboptimal in Poland in part due to the use of various VTE risk scores yielding discrepant results in everyday practice.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Underuse of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients is still common worldwide. Little is known about the use of thromboprophylaxis in patients with pulmonary diseases in everyday hospital practice. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the use of pharmacological prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in real-life patients with pulmonary diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 2 validated scoring systems, i.e., the Padua prediction score and Caprini VTE risk assessment, were used to assess the VTE risk in 2011 patients (1133 men and 878 women), aged 18 years or more, hospitalized for pulmonary diseases (median 6 days) in a single tertiary pulmonary medical center from January to December 2014. RESULTS: Using the Padua prediction score, we identified 428 (21.28%) patients at a high risk for VTE, including 167 (39.01%) who received thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin, and 261 (60.98%) individuals at a high risk without thromboprophylaxis (p < 0.001). A total of 888 (44.16%) patients who scored 5 points or more using the Caprini VTE risk assessment were identified as subjects at a high risk for VTE, including 34.79% of patients receiving thromboprophylaxis. From among patients at a high risk for VTE, 579 (65.20%) did not receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis (p < 0.001). Underuse of thromboprophylaxis was observed more commonly among patients hospitalized for lung cancer or pneumonia (50.60% and 24.87% of patients at a high risk for VTE without prophylaxis, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Thromboprophylaxis is underutilized in hospitalized patients with pulmonary diseases regardless of the scoring system used. Implementation of thromboprophylaxis should be markedly improved in this patient group.
