scholarly journals Predictors of Venous Thromboembolic Events Associated with Central Venous Port Insertion in Cancer Patients

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Hohl Moinat ◽  
Daniel Périard ◽  
Adrienne Grueber ◽  
Daniel Hayoz ◽  
Jean-Luc Magnin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Central Venous Port ◽  
Venous Port ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic

Insertion of central venous port (CVP) catheter in the cancer population is associated with increased incidence of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). However, trials have shown limited benefit of antithrombotic treatment to prevent catheter-related venous thrombosis. This prospective observational cohort study was designed to assess the incidence of VTE closely related to CVP implantation in patients with cancer and undergoing chemotherapy, and to identify a high risk subgroup of patients. Between February 2006 and December 2011, 1097 consecutive cancer patients with first CVP implantation were included. Catheter-related VTE were defined as deep venous thrombosis in the arm, with or without pulmonary embolism (PE), or isolated PE. The incidence of CVP-associated VTE was 5.9% (IC95 4.4–7.3%) at 3 months, and 11.3% (IC95 9.4–13.2%) at 12 months. The incidence of any VTE was 7.6% (IC95 6.0–9.3%) at 3 months, and 15.3% (IC95 13.1–17.6%) at 12 months. High Khorana risk score and lung cancer were significant predictors of 3 month VTE. In conclusion, this large cohort study of patients with first CVP catheter implantation confirms the high incidence of VTE associated with the CVP implantation and allow identifying high risk patients who may benefit from thromboprophylaxis.

scholarly journals Arterial events, venous thromboembolism, thrombocytopenia, and bleeding after vaccination with Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1-S in Denmark and Norway: population based cohort study

BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n1114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Pottegård ◽  
Lars Christian Lund ◽  
Øystein Karlstad ◽  
Jesper Dahl ◽  
Morten Andersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Cerebral Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Coagulation Disorders ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic ◽  
General Populations

Abstract Objective To assess rates of cardiovascular and haemostatic events in the first 28 days after vaccination with the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine ChAdOx1-S in Denmark and Norway and to compare them with rates observed in the general populations. Design Population based cohort study. Setting Nationwide healthcare registers in Denmark and Norway. Participants All people aged 18-65 years who received a first vaccination with ChAdOx1-S from 9 February 2021 to 11 March 2021. The general populations of Denmark (2016-18) and Norway (2018-19) served as comparator cohorts. Main outcome measures Observed 28 day rates of hospital contacts for incident arterial events, venous thromboembolism, thrombocytopenia/coagulation disorders, and bleeding among vaccinated people compared with expected rates, based on national age and sex specific background rates from the general populations of the two countries. Results The vaccinated cohorts comprised 148 792 people in Denmark (median age 45 years, 80% women) and 132 472 in Norway (median age 44 years, 78% women), who received their first dose of ChAdOx1-S. Among 281 264 people who received ChAdOx1-S, the standardised morbidity ratio for arterial events was 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.20). 59 venous thromboembolic events were observed in the vaccinated cohort compared with 30 expected based on the incidence rates in the general population, corresponding to a standardised morbidity ratio of 1.97 (1.50 to 2.54) and 11 (5.6 to 17.0) excess events per 100 000 vaccinations. A higher than expected rate of cerebral venous thrombosis was observed: standardised morbidity ratio 20.25 (8.14 to 41.73); an excess of 2.5 (0.9 to 5.2) events per 100 000 vaccinations. The standardised morbidity ratio for any thrombocytopenia/coagulation disorders was 1.52 (0.97 to 2.25) and for any bleeding was 1.23 (0.97 to 1.55). 15 deaths were observed in the vaccine cohort compared with 44 expected. Conclusions Among recipients of ChAdOx1-S, increased rates of venous thromboembolic events, including cerebral venous thrombosis, were observed. For the remaining safety outcomes, results were largely reassuring, with slightly higher rates of thrombocytopenia/coagulation disorders and bleeding, which could be influenced by increased surveillance of vaccine recipients. The absolute risks of venous thromboembolic events were, however, small, and the findings should be interpreted in the light of the proven beneficial effects of the vaccine, the context of the given country, and the limitations to the generalisability of the study findings.

scholarly journals Upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis related to central venous port systems implanted in cancer patients

2010 ◽  
Vol 83 (994) ◽  
pp. 850-853 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Yukisawa ◽  
Y Fujiwara ◽  
Y Yamamoto ◽  
T Ueno ◽  
K Matsueda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Central Venous Port ◽  
Venous Port ◽  
Port Systems ◽  
Deep Vein

Statins, aspirin and risk of venous thromboembolic events in breast cancer patients

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayelet Shai ◽  
Hedy S. Rennert ◽  
Ofer Lavie ◽  
Muona Ballan-Haj ◽  
Arie Bitterman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic

Modified Khorana risk score for prediction of venous thromboembolic events in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: An Australian single institution experience.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20610-e20610
Author(s):  
Wolfgang H Heller ◽  
Alhossain A Khalafallah ◽  
Rebecca Yuan Li ◽  
Anurag Arora ◽  
Maimoona Latif ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Platelet Count ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
White Cell Count ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Cancer Subtypes ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Venous Thromboembolic ◽  
Breast And Prostate Cancer ◽  
Chemotherapy Patients

e20610 Background: Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) are a common complication in cancer. The Khorana Score (KS) is widely used for the prediction of VTEs in malignancy. The KS is composed of 5 items: cancer entity, platelet count >350/nL, white cell count (WCC) >11/nL, Hb <100 g/L and body mass index ≥35 (BMI). Scores are grouped into 3 categories indicating the VTE-risk (0=low, 1-2= intermediate, 3 or more points= high-risk). Methods: All ambulatory cancer patients at our institution starting chemotherapy from January 2010 to December 2011 were included. We applied the KS and then modified by adding further cancer subtypes and metastatic status. Results: In 658 of 766 chemotherapy patients, all the data were available for calculating the KS, of whom 52 had a VTE. In multivariate analysis, associations between KS and VTE were found (P≤0.05) in pancreas (p<0.001), lung (p=0.002), stomach (p=0.008), gynaecological cancers (p=0.037), and BMI ≥35 (p=0.004), but not found in lymphoma (p=0.14), high platelet count (p=0.6) and high WCC (p=0.8), or low Hb (p=0.53). There was an increased risk for VTE in some cancers not included in the KS: breast (p=0.01), colorectal (CRC)(p<0.001), prostate (p=0.003) and oesophageal cancer (p= 0.041). The original KS score did not significantly predict VTEs. When adding cases of neoadjuvant/adjuvant (n/a) and/or metastatic (met) CRC, breast, and prostate cancer, significant associations were found, as shown in the Table. Conclusions: The original KS showed only a weak association with VTE occurrence. However, the association was improved by including other cancer entities and / or metastatic status. Major differences between our and other cohorts, such as different proportions of cancer entities and general referral patterns, could explain the discrepancies with other studies. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document