Should All Patients Receive Extended Thromboprophylaxis After Resection of Primary Lung Cancer?

Predictors of Venous Thromboembolism After Lung Cancer Resection

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing oncologic operations. We sought to identify risk factors for postoperative VTE to define high-risk groups that may benefit from enhanced prophylactic measures.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis using The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database was conducted on patients who underwent lung cancer resection between 2009 and 2021. Baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were compared between patients who did and did not develop a postoperative pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep venous thrombosis. Multivariable regression models identified risk factors associated with VTE.

RESULTS

Of 57,531 patients who underwent lung cancer resection, a postoperative PE developed in 758 (1.3%). Patients with PE were more likely to be Black (12% vs 7%, P < .001), have interstitial fibrosis (3% vs 2%, P = .016), and prior VTE (12% vs 6%, P < .001). Postoperative PE was most likely to develop in patients with locally advanced disease who underwent bilobectomy (6% vs 4%, P < .001) or pneumonectomy (8% vs 5%, P < .001). Patients with postoperative PE had increased 30-day mortality (14% vs 3%, P < .001), reintubation (25% vs 8%, P < .001), and readmission (49% vs 15%, P < .001). On multivariable analysis, Black race (odds ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.39-2.16; P < .001), interstitial fibrosis (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.15-2.72; P = .009), extent of resection, and increased operative duration were independently predictive of postoperative PE. A minimally invasive approach compared with thoracotomy was protective.

CONCLUSIONS

Because nonmodifiable risk factors (Black race, interstitial fibrosis, and advanced-stage disease) predominate in postoperative PE and VTE-associated mortality is increased, enhanced perioperative prophylactic measures should be considered in high-risk cohorts.

Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis after cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) used as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for thromboprophylaxis after cancer surgery for venous thromboembolic events (VTE) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LMWH in these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science was carried out and included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that directly compared DOACs with LMWH for thromboprophylaxis in patients after cancer surgery through July 25, 2023. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were VTE, major bleeding, and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) within 30 days of surgery. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023445386).

RESULTS

We retrieved 5149articles, selected 27 for eligibility, and included 10 studies (three RCTs and seven observational studies) encompassing 3054 patients who underwent postoperative thromboprophylaxis with DOACs (41%) or LMWH (59%). Compared to LMWH thromboprophylaxis, DOACs had a comparable risk of VTE (RR:0.69[95% CI:0.46-1.02], I2 = 0%), major bleeding (RR:1.55 [95% CI:0.82-2.93], I2 = 2%), and CRNMB (RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.4-1.98], I2 = 31%) during the 30-day postoperative period. Subgroup analysis of VTE and major bleeding suggested no differences according to study type, extended thromboprophylaxis, tumor types, or different types of DOAC.

CONCLUSION

DOACs are potentially effective alternatives to LMWH for thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing cancer surgery, without increasing the risk of major bleeding events.