![]() So it looks like we cannot in good faith use these devices in patients with diagnosed DVT. Since the manufacturers define existing DVT as a contraindication, application of their product would be considered an off-label use. They are white, but don’t do much more than contribute to hospital clothing fashion. ![]() And we probably won’t, ever.Ĭompression stockings seem to be safe, but they really don’t do much. But the simple truth is that we have no solid research that either supports or condemns the use of active compression devices in patients with known DVT. They don’t have any literature either, so I assume it’s an attempt to limit litigation, just in case.īottom line: Walking provides at least as much muscle compression as compression devices. But the key fact is that every compression device manufacturer includes existing DVT as a contraindication in their product documentation. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find a paper from anyone who had the courage to try this. Or perhaps no institutional review board (IRB) would approve it. But interestingly, bedrest alone does not appear to increase the likelihood of PE! It does decrease the risk of developing problems other than the VTE, like pulmonary complications.īut what about compression devices? Common sense would say that you are intermittently increasing pressures in the leg veins, which could dislodge any loose clots and send them flying to the lungs, right? ![]() So just lying in bed is not good, and exercise/ambulation may actually make people feel better. There was a huge amount of variability in the rates of recanalization, but ultimately there were no significant differences with or without exercise. If ambulation makes the pain better, could the veins be recanalizing more quickly? Another study examined a small group of 72 people with DVT receiving anticoagulants, half of whom were prescribed exercise and compression stockings and the other half stockings only. Furthermore, patients who suffered from pain in the affected extremity noted significant improvements with early ambulation. Couldn’t just moving around cause pieces to break off? A meta-analysis of 13 studies published in 2015 showed that early ambulation was not associated with a higher incidence of new PE. Seems logical right? But we know that often, our common sense about things is completely wrong. There has always been the fear that doing things that increase flow in the affected extremity may cause clots to dislodge and ultimately cause a PE. If a patient breaks through their prophylaxis and develops DVT, is it safe to apply compression devices to the extremity? The choices we have are primarily mechanical vs chemical and consist of compression devices (sequential or not) and various heparins.Īn age old question surfaced on my own patient rounds recently. ![]() Screening looks at patient factors such as age, obesity, previous VTE as well as injury risk factors like spine and pelvic fractures, and decreased mobility.īased on the screening protocol, prophylaxis may be prescribed depending upon level of VTE risk, which is then balanced with bleeding risk from brain, solid organ, or other injuries. Nearly every trauma program uses some form of screening and prophylaxis in an attempt to reduce the occurrence of this problem, which can result in deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). ![]() Several groups of them are at higher risk by virtue of the particular injuries they have sustained and the activity restriction caused. Everyone knows that venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potential problem in hospitalized patients, and especially so in trauma patients. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |