Search

Objectives: Prognostic differences between central venous catheters (CVC) carriers and non-carriers, who have upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT), have been described; however, evidence in hospitalized patients is limited., Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included hospitalized patients from March 2012 to March 2023 with UEDVT, classified into CVC-associated and non-CVC-associated UEDVT groups. Rates of thrombotic recurrence, hemorrhage, post-thrombotic syndrome, and death from pulmonary embolism were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models., Results: A total of 135 patients were included (76 with CVC and 59 without CVC), with a mean age of 67±15 years and 44% female. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of the combined endpoint between CVC non-carriers and carriers (5.45 vs 6.74 per 1000 patient-months respectively; HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.51-3.06). After multivariable adjustment, no significant differences in risk were detected (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.44-2.72)., Conclusions: There are no significant prognostic differences between patients with and without CVC hospitalized for UEDVT., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Despite the potential benefits of outpatient care, most patients with pulmonary embolisms are treated in hospitals for fear of possible adverse events. However, there is a wealth of scientific evidence from studies covering more than 4000 outpatients, which has led the current clinical practice guidelines to recommend early discharge or outpatient treatment when a low risk of death or complications has been confirmed, when there are no comorbidities or aggravating processes present to warrant hospitalisation and when appropriate monitoring and treatment are observed. This approach minimises the complications that can arise in hospitals and represents considerable cost savings. When selecting these patients, the use of prognostic tools such as the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI), its simplified version (sPESI) and the Hestia Criteria are of paramount importance. Using these tools, the short-term outcomes (30-90days) show low mortality (in general <3%) and a low incidence of other complications (rate of recurrence and major bleeding <2%). Based on the available evidence, outpatient treatment can be considered the most appropriate strategy at this time for most hemodynamically stable patients with pulmonary embolisms., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and Sociedad Española de Medicina Interna (SEMI). All rights reserved.)

Risk factors for cancer-associated thrombosis are commonly divided into three categories: patient-, cancer-, and treatment-related factors. Currently, different types of drugs are used in cancer treatment. Chemotherapy has been identified as an independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, it should be noted, that the risk of VTE is not consistent among all cytotoxic agents. In addition, different supportive care drugs, such as erythropoiesis stimulating agents or granulocyte colony stimulating factors, and hormonotherapy have been associated to an increased risk of VTE. Immunotherapy and molecular-targeted therapies have significantly changed the treatment of cancer over the past decade. The main subtypes include tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, small molecules, and immunomodulatory agents. The relationship between VTE and targeted therapies remains largely unknown., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. © The Author(s) 2020.)

Infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the development of all manifestations of COVID-19, predisposes to arterial and venous thromboembolic disease. The coagulation system can be activated by various viruses, including SARS-CoV-2. Vascular endothelial damage, added to the development of disseminated intravascular coagulation, affects the prognosis and mortality from this disease. Treatment is aimed at the prevention, early detection and timely interventions of all coagulation disorders generated by COVID-19. The recommended anticoagulant is low molecular weight heparin, taking into account creatinine clearance, and if major invasive procedures will be performed, unfractionated heparin is a safe option., (Copyright: © 2020 Permanyer.)

The disease caused by a new coronavirus, which started in 2019, was named COVID-19 and declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020 by the World Health Organization. Although it is true that the first reports emphasized the respiratory manifestations of this disease as an initial clinical presentation, little by little cases with different initial manifestations began to appear, involving other systems. In cases where central nervous system involvement was identified, the most frequent findings were dizziness, headache, and alteration of alertness. Regarding the cardiovascular system, elevation of cardiac biomarkers and myocarditis are one of the most frequent findings. The main gastrointestinal symptoms described so far are: anorexia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain and/or discomfort. Venous thromboembolism is a frequent complication and a public health problem. Skin manifestations remain a field of investigation. Maculopapular rashes, reticular livedo, acral gangrene, among others, have been identified. Health personnel must be updated on new clinical findings and the forms of presentation of this partially known disease, which will make it possible to make more accurate and timely diagnoses, thus impacting the prognosis of these patients., (Copyright: © 2020 Permanyer.)

In recent years, we have observed a tendency to extend anticoagulant therapy for patients with venous thromboembolism disease (VTE). This practice exposes patients to a greater risk of severe and fatal haemorrhage, which, in certain conditions, outweighs the benefits related to the reduction in disease recurrence. This review examines the evidence in favour of reducing anticoagulant therapy as much as possible, especially for patients with VTE "caused" by temporary risk factors, with isolated deep vein thrombosis and with unprovoked VTE and a high risk of haemorrhage., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and Sociedad Española de Medicina Interna (SEMI). All rights reserved.)

We performed a subanalysis of cancer patients enrolled in a clinical trial that compared long-term (6 months) treatment with a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) administered subcutaneously or with acenocoumarol. The subanalysis assessed whether the characteristics of the tumor had an influence on the clinical response. A randomized open trial included 69 patients with cancer and symptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs. The tumor characteristics and treatment type were recorded. The main assessment criterion was the 12-month incidence of recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE). Sixty-one patients (88.4%) were analyzed. At the time of inclusion, the cancer characteristics and treatment were comparable between the 2 groups. Over the course of 12 months, the recurrent VTE was significantly greater in the elderly patients (71.5 ± 6.4 vs. 62.0 ± 15.1; p=.006). The logistic regression analysis showed no association between VTE recurrence and the location or extent of the tumor. However, the use of thrombogenic chemotherapy (p=.045) was independently associated with VTE recurrence, and longterm treatment with tinzaparin was almost a protective factor (p=.15). In this small sample, we observed an association between thrombogenic chemotherapy and recurrent VTE. The tendency towards a reduction in VTE recurrence at 12 months in patients with cancer in the LMWH group could be attributed to the effect of the full LMWH dosage., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The study aims to determine the percentage of patients treated at home with an indication of prophylaxis of thromboembolic disease (TED) according to the PRETEMED guidelines and whether they receive such prophylaxis., Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in Segovia Palace Health Centre (Madrid)., Inclusion Criteria: to be included in the domiciliary care protocol., Exclusion Criteria: terminal patient, hospitalised or surgery in the last 3 months. The variables used include, age, sex, duration of domiciliary care, mobility, anticoagulant or antiplatelet treatment and reason, and associated and precipitating factors to calculate the risk of TED according to the PRETEMED guidelines, and if they receive such prophylaxis, by reviewing computerised medical records and meeting with the staff responsible., Results: The study included a total of 187 patients, of whom 81% were women There was a significant differences in mean age by sex (men, 76.91 years, 95% CI; 72.59-81.24, and women, 86.72 years, 95% CI; 72.59-81.24, P<.05). Almost two-thirds (65%) walked in the home. There were 3.7% patients who had an indication for receiving prophylaxis, but did not receive it, although 85.8% of them were on anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy for other reasons., Conclusions: Most patients in domiciliary care have a low baseline risk of developing a TED episode in our study. There should be more emphasis placed on the prophylaxis of TED in acute medical episodes in which patients with slightly elevated risk may increase the likelihood of TED. Observational studies should be conducted to study the baseline risk and the subsequent development of TED in the population receiving home care., (Copyright © 2012 Sociedad Española de Médicos de Atención Primaria (SEMERGEN). Publicado por Elsevier España. All rights reserved.)