ArticleSpinal cord2026
Association between early chemoprophylaxis versus no chemoprophylaxis and risk of venous thromboembolism and bleeding complications after same-day spine surgery for central cord syndrome: a retrospective cohort analysis.
Article in Spinal cord, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective cohort study.
objectivesTo examine whether early chemoprophylaxis, compared with no chemoprophylaxis, is associated with a reduced risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding complications after spine surgery for acute central cord syndrome (CCS).
settingMulti-site academic centers.
methodsThis pre-registered study using the TriNetX database included adults who underwent primary cervical spine surgery the same day they sustained a CCS. After excluding those with very high VTE risk or prior VTE, we divided participants into cohorts depending on the administration of chemoprophylaxis (heparin or enoxaparin; chemoprophylaxis cohort) versus no chemoprophylaxis (no chemoprophylaxis cohort) within the first three days after surgery. Outcomes through three months included the incidence and risk ratio (RR) of VTE (primary), pulmonary embolism (PE), deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and deceased status. Cohorts were propensity matched according to key risk factors.
resultsThere were 2417 participants per matched cohort with high follow-up retention (98%). Between cohorts, there was no statistically significant or clinically meaningful difference in the risk of VTE (p = 0.375) over three months' follow-up. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of PE (p = 0.762) or DVT (p = 0.384). We were unable to assess the risk of epidural hematoma or severe postoperative bleeding as both outcomes were rare.
conclusionEarly postoperative chemoprophylaxis was not associated with reduced VTE risk compared with no chemoprophylaxis after spine surgery for acute CCS in adults. These findings do not provide evidence supporting routine chemoprophylaxis use in CCS participants after surgery. However, clinical decisions should remain individualized, particularly for higher-risk participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42106572What 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.