Forbes, S

Green, L

Kohli, R

MacCallum, P

Thuraisingham, R

British Journal of Haematology

English

Queen Mary Research Online

BSH2019Thrombosis and haemostasisBSH2019-436SURVEY OF THROMBOPROPHYLAXIS STRATEGIES IN RENAL TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS AT A SINGLETRANSPLANT UNITRuchika Kohli* 1, Suzanne Forbes2, Raj Thuraisingham3, Laura Green3, Peter MacCallum41Haematology, Queen Mary University of London, 2Renal Medicine, 3Barts Health NHS Trust, 4Queen Mary University ofLondon, London, United KingdomPlease indicate your preferred method of presentation: PosterHas this abstract been presented at a British Haematology meeting before?: NoHas this abstract been presented at an overseas meeting?: NoPlease select your position from the list.: OtherAbstract Content: In 2015-16 there were 2,945 renal transplants performed in the UK, a figure which is likely to increase withimplementation of the national organ donation strategy.Renal transplant recipients are a unique cohort in that renal failure and surgery increase their risks of thrombosis and bleeding, withpotentially devastating consequences including the loss of a transplanted kidney and increased cost for the NHS. Current thromboprophylaxis strategies are based on evidence extrapolated from general surgical patients. No studies haveevaluated the optimal approach to VTE prophylaxis following renal transplantation. The aim of the survey was to understand current thromboprophylaxis practice in renal transplant recipients and determine if the needfor a consensus guideline exists.The survey was developed using Google forms and sent out via email to consultant nephrologists and transplant surgeons at the RoyalLondon Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust.Of 22 eligible consultants, 13 (59%) responded. 9/13 (69%) answered to having a defined thromboprophylaxis protocol. 12/13 (92%)respondents routinely administered thromboprophylaxis with all mentioning LMWH as the preferred anticoagulant. Of these, therewas variation in the onset of prophylaxis with 6/12 (50%) starting 12-24 hours post, 3/12 (25%) starting 6-12 hours post, 1/12 (8%)<6 hours post and 1/12 (8%) >24 hours post-surgery (one participant did not respond). All agreed that prophylaxis should continuefor 5-7 days post-transplant.  8/13 (62%) categorized patients into high/low risk for thrombosis and of these 7 (88%) based this onthrombophilia screening results with 6 (75%) administering unfractionated heparin intra-op. The dose of heparin used again wasvariable.Although there was uniform consensus on the modality of thromboprophylaxis for renal transplant recipients there was variation inthe onset of thromboprophylaxis, and in categorization of patients into high or low risk group for thrombosis, confirming that furtherstudies are needed to give more clarity to this topic. Disclosure of Interest: None DeclaredKeywords: Renal transplant, Thromboprophylaxis

Survey of thromboprophylaxis strategies in renal transplant recipients at a single transplant unit

https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/bitstream/123456789/65948/2/Kohli%20Survey%20of%20thromboprophylaxis%20strategies%20in%20renal%20transplant%20recipients%20at%20a%20single%20transplant%20unit%202019%20Accepted.pdf

Survey of thromboprophylaxis strategies in renal transplant recipients at a single transplant unit

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Queen Mary Research Online