Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35937655›Full record

ReviewCentral European journal of urology2022

Current thromboprophylaxis in urological cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic.

Adam Ostrowski, Piotr Skrudlik, Filip Kowalski, Paweł Lipowski, Magdalena Ostrowska, Przemysław Adamczyk, Jan Adamowicz, Tomasz Drewa, Kajetan Juszczak

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Central European journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Adam OstrowskiDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Piotr SkrudlikDepartment of Urology, NEO Hospital, Cracow, Poland.
Filip KowalskiDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Paweł LipowskiDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Magdalena OstrowskaDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Przemysław AdamczykDepartment of Urology, Department of General and Oncologic Urology, Nicolaus Copernicus Hospital, Toruń, Poland.
Jan AdamowiczDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Tomasz DrewaDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Kajetan JuszczakDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland.
Nicolaus Copernicus University · PLCracow University of Technology · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Venous thrombosis is a well-known complication of cancer disease, especially in Urology. However, even though proper antithrombotic prophylaxis is crucial in most urological procedures, we have insufficient high-quality studies on this topic. The European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines are outdated and lack data on COVID-19 increased risk of thrombosis. This review aimed to summarize data on thromboprophylaxis after radical prostatectomy, cystectomy, and nephrectomy during COVID-19 pandemic. Material and methods: A thorough analysis of the EAU Guidelines of Thromboprophylaxis was performed and compared to PubMed search, considering updated literature on thromboprophylaxis of radical prostatectomy, cystectomy, nephrectomy, as well as COVID-19 influence on venous thrombosis and urological practice. Results: Each patient should be evaluated individually to balance bleeding and venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. There is still much uncertainty in low and medium-risk patients and all endoscopic procedures, where thromboprophylaxis could be omitted. Patients with COVID infection bear a significantly higher risk of VTE. All patients should be tested for COVID infection prior to a planned surgery during bursts of infections, undependably of vaccination status. Efforts to maintain early cancer diagnosis and treatment during the pandemic should be maintained. Conclusions: The quality of evidence is inadequate, and when deciding on thromboprophylaxis, we need to base it on individual risk, cancer advancement, procedure type, and our own experience.

Indexed as

COVID-19thromboprophylaxisthrombosisurologic neoplasmsvenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID35937655
PMCPMC9326695
OpenAlexW4226060691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.