4 research outputs found

    Is venous thromboembolism prophylaxis beneficial in upper limb major joint replacement surgery? A systematic review

    No full text
    Background Upper limb arthroplasty is an increasingly used treatment modality for end-stage joint disease of the shoulder, elbow and wrist. Whilst complications have been reported, the risk of venous thromboembolism has received less attention when compared to the lower limb. Guidance to aid clinical decision-making remains limited. This review aims to ascertain whether venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is beneficial after upper limb major joint replacement surgery. Methods A systematic review was performed in April 2019, utilising EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane and Google Scholar. All clinical studies reporting venous thromboembolism incidence and risk reduction (after prophylaxis) in upper limb joint replacement were included. Results Twenty-four observational studies were identified. The reported incidence of venous thromboembolism ranged from 0.2% to 16% (weighted mean 0.68%) and 0.2% to 0.8% (weighted mean 0.49%) in shoulder and elbow arthroplasty, respectively. No records for wrist arthroplasty were found. In the literature, baseline venous thromboembolism risk of patients without an operation is reported as 0.5%. Discussion There is a lack of good quality evidence regarding the risks and benefits of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in upper limb major joint replacement surgery. We recommend further research, ideally formal randomised controlled trials to guide recommendations. Although venous thromboembolism is rare in upper limb surgery, surgeons should remain vigilant to this possibility.</p

    The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery

    The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    AimThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery.MethodsThis was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin.ResultsOverall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P ConclusionOne in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

    Evaluation and management of atypical femoral fractures: an update of current knowledge

    No full text
    corecore