| 1. |
- Lund, Lars, et al.
(author)
-
Use of venous-thrombotic-embolic prophylaxis in patients undergoing surgery for renal tumors : a questionnaire survey in the Nordic countries (The NORENCA-2 study)
- 2018
-
In: Research and Reports in Urology. - : DOVE Medical Press Ltd.. - 2253-2447. ; 10, s. 181-187
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Purpose: To examine the variation in venous thromboembolism prophylactic treatment (VTEP) among renal cancer patients undergoing surgery.Materials and methods: An Internet-based questionnaire on renal tumor management before and after surgery was mailed to all Nordic departments of urology. The questions focused on the use of VTEP and were subdivided into different surgical modalities.Results: Questionnaires were mailed to 91 institutions (response rate 53%). None of the centers used VTEP before surgery, unless the patient had a vena caval tumor thrombus. Overall, the VTEP utilized during hospitalization for patients undergoing renal surgery included early mobilization (45%), compression stockings (52%) and low-molecular-weight heparin (89%). In patients undergoing open radical Nx, 80% of institutions used VTEP during their hospitalization (23% compression stockings and 94% low-molecular-weight heparin). After leaving the hospital, the proportion and type of VTEP received varied considerably across institutions. The most common interval, used in 60% of the institutions, was for a period of 4 weeks. The restriction to the Nordic countries was a limitation and, therefore, may not reflect the practice patterns elsewhere. It is a survey study and, therefore, cannot measure the behaviors of those institutions that did not participate.Conclusion: We found variation in the type and duration of VTEP use for each type of local intervention for renal cancer. These widely disparate variations in care strongly argue for the establishment of national and international guidelines regarding VTEP in renal surgery.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Lund, Lars, et al.
(author)
-
Use of venous-thrombotic-embolic (vte) prophylaxis in patients undergoing surgery for renal tumors in Nordic countries (the Norenca-II study)
- 2017
-
In: Scandinavian journal of urology. - : Taylor & Francis. - 2168-1805 .- 2168-1813. ; 51:Suppl. 220, s. 48-48
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Introduction: Development of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is due to a homeostatic imbalance in the interaction between the vessel wall, flow and blood composition. Reduced flow is a wellknown risk factor for VTE. Cancer patients often have reduced flow, particularly associated with prolonged immobilization or by direct compression of the veins by a growing tumor.Objectives: The purpose of the study is to examine whether renal cancer patients in the five Nordic countries undergoing surgery receive VTE prophylactic treatment (VTEP).Methods: A 21-question internet based questionnaire on renal tumor management before and after surgery was mailed to all Nordic departments performing renal cancer surgery. The questions were subdivided into the different surgical modalities and the use of VTEP. Descriptive statistics were performed.Results: The questionnaires were posted to 91 institutions of which 6 did not perform renal surgery in 2016. We received responses from 45 of 85 hospitals performing renal surgery (response rate 53%). None of the centers used VTEP before surgery unless the patient had a vena caval tumor thrombus. Overall, VTEP in the hospital for patients undergoing renal surgery included 47% using early mobilization, 53% compression stocking and 88% low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). In patients undergoing open radical or partial Nx, 79% received VTEP (24% compression stockings, 2% subcutaneous heparin and 94% LMWH). After leaving the hospital the proportion of patients received VTEP for differing periods (6% for one week, 35% for 2 weeks, and 59% for four weeks). In patients undergoing robotic radical Nx 19% received VTEP for one week, 44% for 2 weeks and 37% for 4 weeks. For those who underwent Lap/robotic partial Nx, 69% received VTEP. In these, in total 30% had compression stockings, 10% subcutaneous heparin and 87% received LMWH. VTEP was continued for one week, 2 weeks and four weeks for 20%, 50% and 30% of the patients respectively. Five centers performed lap/robotic thermal ablation of tumors and overall 57% used compression stockings and 71% LMWH. Two centers continued VTEP for one week (40%) and three for 2 weeks (60%). Two centers performed percutaneous ablation.Conclusion: We found differences in duration of VTEP use by type of operation and across differing facilities. Given the highly varied approach to VTEP, the presented data suggests a need for national and international guidelines to help reduce the variations in care regarding VTE prophylaxis in renal surgery.
|
|
