ArticleAsian spine journal2025
Efficacy of chemical prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism after degenerative spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of chemical prophylaxis in preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE) and spinal epidural hematoma (SEH) following degenerative spine surgery. The effectiveness of chemical prophylaxis in preventing VTE and SEH following degenerative spine surgery remains controversial, with variability in protocols and a lack of comprehensive, high-quality studies guiding optimal prophylaxis strategies. An electronic search across five databases, including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science, was performed on February 2, 2024 to identify studies comparing chemical with nonchemical prophylaxis for VTE among degenerative spine surgery patients. Studies reporting on VTE (deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and SEH were included. Patients under 18 years of age and those with trauma, tumors, infections, congenital deformities, and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis were excluded. Data on study characteristics, clinical details, and outcomes were collected. Metaanalyses were conducted to compare patients received chemical and non-chemical prophylaxis for VTE. Subgroup analyses according to the type of medication used for the chemical prophylaxis, study design, dosage regimen, and study quality were also performed. A total of 17 studies involving 5,383 patients satisfied our eligibility criteria. No significant difference in VTE incidence was observed between patients receiving chemical and non-chemical prophylaxis (risk ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.46; p=0.988). Subgroup analyses also showed consistent results (p>0.05). SEH incidence was reported in five studies (29.4%) involving five cases, among whom three and two were in the control and chemoprophylaxis groups, respectively. Perioperative chemoprophylaxis may not significantly alter VTE or SEH rates following degenerative spine surgery. This study highlights the need for further high-quality studies to establish better recommendations for VTE prophylaxis after degenerative spine surgeries (PROSPERO registration no., CRD42024585493).
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.