ArticleCureus2026
Safety and Efficacy of Deep Venous Thrombosis Chemoprophylaxis in Neurosurgery Patients.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveDeep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) remain significant sources of morbidity and mortality in neurosurgical patients. Although chemoprophylaxis has been shown to reduce thromboembolic events, its routine use is controversial due to the potential risk of hemorrhagic complications. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of DVT chemoprophylaxis compared with no chemoprophylaxis in postoperative neurosurgical patients.
methodsWe conducted a single-center retrospective chart review of adult patients who underwent neurosurgical procedures in 2019 with a hospital stay ≥5 days. The primary outcome was the incidence of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) within 90 days. Secondary outcomes measured were bleeding, wound complications, and return to the operating room within 30 days. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the association of chemoprophylaxis with outcomes, adjusting for key covariates. Subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of prophylaxis timing.
resultsA total of 340 patients met the study criteria. Chemoprophylaxis was administered to 176 patients (51.8%). Symptomatic VTE occurred in seven patients (2.06%). Use of chemoprophylaxis was not associated with reduced VTE risk (OR 4.6, p = 0.17). Spinal surgery compared to cranial surgery (OR 13.7, p = 0.03) and prior VTE history (OR 26.0, p = 0.03) were independently associated with higher VTE risk. Bleeding and wound complications were rare (<1%) and were not associated with chemoprophylaxis. Subgroup analysis of patients who received chemoprophylaxis demonstrated that timing of initiation was not significantly associated with VTE rates.
conclusionNo statistically significant association was detected between DVT chemoprophylaxis and symptomatic VTE in this cohort. The higher observed VTE rate among patients receiving chemoprophylaxis should not be interpreted as evidence of reduced efficacy or increased VTE risk given the non-randomized design and potential for confounding by indication. The low frequency of bleeding and wound complications is reassuring, but the small number of events limits conclusions regarding safety. Individualized risk stratification may be particularly important for patients undergoing spinal surgery or with prior VTE. Prospective multicenter studies are needed to better define optimal prophylaxis strategies.
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.