ReviewHNO2017
[Prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events in head and neck surgery].
Review in HNO, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApplication of perioperative thrombosis prophylaxis in head and neck surgery lacks consistent standards in Germany. Due to sparse data, the latest German S3 guideline concerning prophylaxis of thromboembolic events recommends a restrictive handling of anticoagulants in head and neck surgery, with few specific recommendations.
objectiveThe aim of this paper is to provide concrete clinical recommendations based on a systematic literature review and the S3 guidelines. MATERIALS AND
methodsA keyword-based literature search was performed and the German S3 guideline "Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolic Events" was used to state the current level of evidence and provide a clinical algorithm.
resultsEight additional cohort studies dealing with the incidence of thromboembolic events in head and neck surgery were identified. There were no randomized controlled trials. In the proposed algorithm, a classification of dispositional (patient history) and expositional (operation time) risk into three groups enables preoperative risk evaluation indicating the individual demand for prophylaxis. In short operations without major tissue traumatization, routine drug-based thrombosis prophylaxis is not necessary, provided no third-grade risk factors (earlier thromboembolic event, coagulopathy, or malignant disease) are present. Low molecular weight heparins should be used as anticoagulants for drug-based prophylaxis.
conclusionProphylaxis of thromboembolic events in head and neck surgery is of high clinical relevance but there is currently limited evidence regarding its implementation. This paper is based on a systematic literature review and provides a clinical algorithm for head and neck surgeons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.