Advertisement

Venous Thromboembolism in Moderate Risk Patients

  • Edward Genton

Abstract

The incidence and significance of venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism as a complication in hospitalized patients treated medically or surgically is well established. The incidence of venous thrombosis varies considerably between patient groups based upon numerous factors in addition to the severity of the medical illness or surgical procedure. These other factors include; age of patient, the presence of congestive heart failure, history of prior thromboembolism, etc. The risk of venous thrombosis progressively increases with the number of these risk factors. (Table 1) Therefore, it is possible to categorize patients on the level of their risk for venous thrombosis which is of value not only to identify patients most in need of prophylaxis but also to determine the prophylactic measure because in general the greater the thrombogenic stimulus the more intense the antithrombotic prophylaxis required.

Keywords

Deep Vein Thrombosis Venous Thrombosis Oral Anticoagulant Antithrombotic Prophylaxis Postoperative Deep Venous Thrombosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Dick W Matis, Mayer W Thromb Diath Haemorrh. 3–11–19 1959 Results of Alternating Prophylaxis in SurgeryGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Storm O — Thromb et Diath Haemorrh 2–484–491 1958. Anticoagulant Protection in Surgery.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson GM, Hull E — Am Ht J 39–697–701–50. The Effect of Dicumarol Upon the Mortality and Incidence of Thromboembolic Complications in Congestive Heart Failure.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harvey WP, Finch CA N Engl J Med 242–208–211 1950. Dicumarol Prophylaxis of Thromboembolic Disease in Congestive Heart Failure.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Members Working Party. Brit Med J. 1–335–342–1969. Assessment of Short-term Anticoagulant Therapy in Coronary Thrombosis to the Medical Research Council.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anticoagulants in Acute Myocardial Infarction. JAMA 225–724–729 1973. Results of a Cooperative Clinical Trial.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drapkin A, Merskey C. JAMA 222–541–548 1972. Anticoagulant Therapy After Acute Myocardial Infarction.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nicolaides AN, Kakkar V.V., Renney JTG, Ridner PH et al. Brit Med J 1–432–434 1971. Myocardial Infarction and Deep Vein Thrombosis.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Handley AJ, Emerson PR. Brit Med J 2–436–438 1972. Heparin in the Prevention of Deep Vein Thrombosis After Myocardial Infarction.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wray R, Maurer B, Shillingford J. New Engl J. Med 288–815–817 1973. Prophylactic Anticoagulant Therapy in the Prevention of Calf-vein Thrombosis After Myocardial Infarctionf.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vroonhoven TJ, Zijl J, Muller H. Lancet. 375–377 1974. Low Dose Subcutaneous Heparin Versus Oral Anticoagulants in the Prevention of Postoperative Deep Venous Thrombosis.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Taberner DA Poller L, Burslem RW, Jones JB. Brit Med J 1–272–274 1978. Oral Anticoagulants Controlled by the British Comparitive Thromboplastin Versus Low Dose Heparin in Prophylaxis of Deep Vein Thrombosis.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward Genton
    • 1
  1. 1.Ochsner ClinicNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations