ArticleInteractive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2022
Are sequential compression devices routinely necessary following enhanced recovery after thoracic surgery?
Article in Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe prominence of "enhanced recovery after surgery" (ERAS) protocols being adopted in thoracic surgery requires a re-evaluation of mechanical venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis guidelines. The goal of this study was to assess the role of sequential compression devices (SCD) in the prevention of VTEs such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (PE) in thoracic surgical patients.
methodsWe identified 200 patients who underwent elective oncological thoracic surgery between December 2018 and December 2020 in 2 cohorts-1 with SCDs and 1 without (i.e. non-SCD). All patients followed a standardized enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol. The quality of care provided by SCDs was evaluated by the incidence and severity of postoperative and follow-up VTEs. Cohorts were compared by the Caprini score (CS) and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) with a two one-sided t-test analysis. Secondary outcomes include perioperative characteristics and follow-up data.
resultsOnly 2 patients within the SCD group developed a PE with average CS and CCI metrics, both after hospital discharge and treated with anticoagulants, raising concern over the prophylactic nature of SCDs. The CS (6.9 ± 1.3 and 6.9 ± 1.5; P = 0.96) and the CCI (3.8 ± 2.0 and 4.1 ± 2.6; P = 0.33) for non-SCD and SCD, respectively, did not differ. The two one-sided t-test analysis for CS (P < 0.001) and CCI (P < 0.001) demonstrated equivalence.
conclusionsAlthough larger studies are required to confirm these results, routine SCD use may not be required when implementing ERAS protocols because clinically significant VTE rates were minimal.
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.