Aspirin compared to enoxaparin or rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis following hip and knee replacement.

Background:The risk of venous thromboembolism following major orthopaedic surgery is among the highest for all surgical specialties. Our hospital guidelines for thromboprophylaxis following elective primary total hip or knee replacement are based on American College of Chest Physicians guidance. The most recent change to local guidelines was the introduction of the extended aspirin regimen as standard thromboprophylaxis. Objective: To establish the appropriateness of this regimen by comparing venous thromboembolism rates in patients receiving extended aspirin to previous regimens. Setting The largest dedicated orthopaedic hospital in Ireland. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. Data were collected from patient record software. All eligible patients undergoing primary total hip or knee replacement between 1st January 2010 and 30th June 2016 were included. Main outcome measure Venous thromboembolism up to 6 months post-operatively. Results Of the 6548 participants (55.3% female, mean age 65.4 years (± 11.8 years, 55.8% underwent total hip replacement), venous thromboembolism occurred in 65 (0.99%). Venous thromboembolism rate in both the inpatient enoxaparin group (n = 961) and extended aspirin group (n = 3460) was 1.04% and was 0.66% in the modified rivaroxaban group (n = 1212). Non-inferiority analysis showed the extended aspirin regimen to be equivalent to the modified rivaroxaban regimen. History of venous thromboembolism was the only significant demographic risk factor for post-operative venous thromboembolism (0.87% vs. 3.54%, p  = 0.0002). Conclusion: In daily clinical practice, extended aspirin regimen is at least as effective as modified rivaroxaban for preventing clinically important venous thromboembolism among patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty who are discharged from the hospital without complications. Aspirin can be considered a safe and effective agent in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip or total knee replacement

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries