Congenital and acquired thrombotic risk factors in lymphoma patients bearing upper extremities deep venous thrombosis: a preliminary report

Venous thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients: Actual relationships between epidemiology, mechanisms, clinical profile and treatment

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are an underestimated health problem in patients with lymphoma. Many factors contribute to the pathogenesis of thromboembolism and the interplay between various mechanisms that provoke VTE is still poorly understood. The identification of parameters that are associated with an increased risk of VTE in lymphoma patients led to the creation of several risk-assessment models. The models that evaluate potential VTE risk in lymphoma patients in particular are quite limited, and have to be validated in larger study populations. Furthermore, the VTE prophylaxis in lymphoma patients is largely underused, despite the incidence of VTE. The lack of adequate guidelines for the prophylaxis and treatment of VTE in lymphoma patients, together with a cautious approach due to an increased risk of bleeding, demands great efforts to ensure the implementation of current knowledge in order to reduce the incidence and complications of VTE in lymphoma patients.

Thrombotic complications in adult patients with lymphoma: a meta-analysis of 29 independent cohorts including 18 018 patients and 1149 events

Thrombotic complications in hematologic malignancies have important clinical implications. In this meta-analysis we sought to obtain accurate estimates of the thrombotic risk in lymphoma patients. Articles were searched in electronic databases and references. Eighteen articles were identified (29 cohorts, 18 018 patients and 1149 events). Pooled incidence rates (IRs) were calculated by the use of a method based on the exact maximum likelihood binomial distribution. The global IR of thrombosis was 6.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0%-6.8%). The global IRs of venous or arterial events were 5.3% (95% CI, 5.0%-5.7%) and 1.1% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.2%), respectively. The IR of thrombosis observed in subjects with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) was 6.5% (95% CI, 6.1%-6.9%), significantly greater than that observed for patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (4.7%; 95% CI, 3.9%-5.6%). Within NHL, patients with high-grade disease had a greater risk of events (IR 8.3%; 95% CI, 7.0%-9.9%) than low-grade disease (IR 6.3%; 95% CI, 4.5%-8.9%). This meta-analysis shows that the IR of thrombosis in lymphoma patients is quite high, especially in those with NHL at an advanced stage of the disease. These results may help better defining lymphoma populations at high thrombotic risk, to whom prophylactic approaches could be preferentially applied.

Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism and prophylaxis in an integrated hospital delivery system

BACKGROUND

Without prophylaxis, hospital-acquired deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is approximately 10-40% among medical or general surgical patients and thromboprophylaxis for high-risk patients is currently recommended. This study analyse the risk factors associated with patients who developed a hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE) and what prior prophylaxis, if any, were given to these patients.

METHODS

We identified 1 year of secondary VTE from seven metropolitan hospitals. A random sample was selected and reviewed retrospectively. Data abstracted included age, gender, VTE risk factors, surgeries, VTE prophylaxis, and anticoagulant dosing. Data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients with mean age 72.1 years (range 23-96) and 55.1% female. There were 60.2% DVT followed by 36.4% pulmonary embolism (PE); 7.6% had both DVT and PE diagnosed. About 73.7% of the study patients had two or more VTE risk factors. Five (4.2%) patients with hospital-acquired VTE had no risk factors. Overall, 88.5% of patients with risk factors received adequate VTE prophylaxis; 20.3% received heparin or enoxaparin, 56.6% received warfarin, and 11.5% received mechanical prophylaxis secondary to drug contraindications. Nine (8.0%) patients with risk factors and no contraindications, did not received any prophylaxis while four patients (3.5%) received inadequate prophylaxis. All-cause mortality was 13.6% (16/118).

CONCLUSION

Less than 5% of hospital-acquired VTE occurred in patients with no risk factors while 74% occurred in patients with two or more risk factors. In this seven-hospital study, 11.5% of hospital-acquired VTE with prior risk factors did not receive adequate prophylaxis. Educational in-services on the new CHEST guidelines should be provided within the hospitals to increase adherence to prophylaxis guidelines.

Vena cava filters in cancer patients: experience with 50 patients

OBJECTIVE

To study the immediate and late results obtained from the implantation of vena cava filters in cancer patients with deep vein thrombosis concomitant with neoplasia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective evaluation of 50 patients with an association of cancer and deep venous thrombosis who underwent interruption of the inferior vena cava and the insertion of permanent vena cava filters. The indications for the procedure, filter implantation technique, early and late complications related to the operation, and the clinical evolution were evaluated.

RESULTS

The most frequent indication for filter implantation was the contraindication for full anticoagulant treatment (80%). The femoral vein was the preferred access route (86% of the patients). There were no complications related to the surgical procedure. During the follow-up, the following complications were observed: 1 episode of nonfatal pulmonary thromboembolism, 2 cases of occlusion of the inferior vena cava, and 1 case of thrombus retained in the device. Twenty patients (40%) died due to progression of the neoplasm.

CONCLUSIONS

Interruption of the inferior cava vein using an endoluminal filter is a procedure with a low rate of complications. It is a safe and efficient measure for preventing pulmonary embolism in cancer patients who have deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs.

The role of d-dimer as first marker of thrombophilia in women affected by sterility: implications in pathophysiology and diagnosis of thrombophilia induced sterility

BACKGROUND: D-dimer is considered a marker of hypercoagulable state and of endogenous fibrinolysis, so increased d-dimer is detectable in patients affected by thrombosis. Yet, several studies showed that also infertility, in particular secondary infertility due to recurrent fetal losses, has been often related to thrombotic events, in particular in women carrying thrombotic risk factors such as inherited thrombophilia (MTHFRC677T, PTHRA20210G, Factor V Leiden polimorphisms and/or inhAfter this screening we selected 39erited protein C, protein S, AT III deficiency) or acquired thrombophilia (primary antiphospholipid syndrome, acquired protein C, protein S, AT III deficiency, drugs induced thrombophilia). However, because its high predictive negative value in case of suspected thrombosis, increased d-dimer has been often associated to subclinical thrombophilia. The aim of this study is to investigate the role of d-dimer as first marker of thrombophilia in women affected by unexplained infertility and subsequently to search the cause of increased d-dimer, such as inherited and/or acquired thrombophilia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We selected 79 patients with unexplained primary or secondary infertility. We excluded 40 patients affected by hydrosalpinx, uterine fibroids, uterine malformations, endocrinological and immunological diseases, luteal insufficiency, cytogenetical alterations. All remaining 39 patients were tested for d-dimer and divided in two groups: the patients of group A (25 patients) showed increased plasma d-dimer, in group B were included 14 patients with normal plasma level of d-dimer. After this step all 39 patients were screened for MTHFRC677T, PTHRA20210G, Factor V Leiden polimorphisms, protein C, protein S, AT III, anticardiolipin IgM and IgG, lupus anticoagulant. In the control group were included 15 age matched women without sterility problems referred to our outpatient's section of vascular medicine for suspected deep venous thrombosis.Statistical analysis was based on chi2 test, differences were considered to be significant if p < 0.05. RESULTS: D-dimer was increased in 25/39 and 20/25 showed inherited/acquired thrombophilia while patients with normal d-dimer showed inherited/acquired thrombophilia in 7/14 (p: < 0.05, s). DISCUSSION: D-dimer is a well known marker of hypercoagulable state, in particular its high predictive negative value in case of suspected thrombosis has been recognised by several reports. Yet, increased d-dimer has been identified also for subclinical thrombophilia besides for vascular thrombosis. Our data, in fact, for the first time suggest an interesting role of d-dimer to identify women affected by unexplained primary or secondary infertility and thrombophilia. So, probably there is a role for d-dimer in these subjects for its predictive positive value. Of course, further data on large based population are needed to confirm our results, because these findings may speed up a diagnostic screening in these patients also for a good cost/effectiveness of this test.