[Incidence and risk factors of venous thromboembolism in major spinal surgery with no chemical or mechanical prophylaxis]. / Incidencia y factores de riesgo de enfermedad tromboembólica venosa en cirugía mayor espinal, sin profilaxis química o mecánica.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence of venous thromboembolism in spine surgery with no chemical and mechanical prophylaxis, and to determine the specific risk factors for this complication. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A historical cohort was analysed. All patients subjected to major spinal surgery, between January 2010 and September 2014, were included. No chemical or mechanical prophylaxis was administered in any patient. Active mobilisation of lower limbs was indicated immediately after surgery, and early ambulation started in the first 24-48 hours after surgery. Clinically symptomatic cases were confirmed by Doppler ultrasound of the lower limbs or chest CT angiography. RESULTS: A sample of 1092 cases was studied. Thromboembolic events were observed in 6 cases (.54%); 3 cases (.27%) with deep venous thrombosis and 3 cases (.27%) with pulmonary thromboembolism. A lethal case was identified (.09%). There were no cases of major bleeding or epidural haematoma. The following risk factors were identified: a multilevel fusion at more than 4 levels, surgeries longer than 130 minutes, patients older than 70 years of age, hypertension, and degenerative scoliosis. DISCUSSION: There is little scientific evidence on the prevention of thromboembolic events in spinal surgery. In addition to the disparity of prophylactic methods indicated by different specialists, it is important to weigh the risk-benefit of intra- and post-operative bleeding, and even the appearance of an epidural haematoma. Prophylaxis should be assessed in elderly patients over 70 years old, who are subjected to surgeries longer than 130 minutes, when 4 or more levels are involved.

Donor age and early graft failure after lung transplantation: a cohort study.

Lungs from older adult organ donors are often unused because of concerns for increased mortality. We examined associations between donor age and transplant outcomes among 8860 adult lung transplant recipients using Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and Lung Transplant Outcomes Group data. We used stratified Cox proportional hazard models and generalized linear mixed models to examine associations between donor age and both 1-year graft failure and primary graft dysfunction (PGD). The rate of 1-year graft failure was similar among recipients of lungs from donors age 18-64 years, but severely ill recipients (Lung Allocation Score [LAS] >47.7 or use of mechanical ventilation) of lungs from donors age 56-64 years had increased rates of 1-year graft failure (p-values for interaction = 0.04 and 0.02, respectively). Recipients of lungs from donors <18 and ≥65 years had increased rates of 1-year graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.23, 95% CI 1.01-1.50 and adjusted HR 2.15, 95% CI 1.47-3.15, respectively). Donor age was not associated with the risk of PGD. In summary, the use of lungs from donors age 56 to 64 years may be safe for adult candidates without a high LAS and the use of lungs from pediatric donors is associated with a small increase in early graft failure.