Thromboprophylaxis in Abdominoplasty: Efficacy and Safety of a Complete Perioperative Protocol.
10.5999/aps.2016.43.4.360
- Author:
Giovanni Francesco MARANGI
1
;
Francesco SEGRETO
;
Igor POCCIA
;
Stefano CAMPA
;
Daniele TOSI
;
Daniela LAMBERTI
;
Paolo PERSICHETTI
Author Information
1. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Campus Bio-Medico di Roma University, Rome, Italy. francescosegreto@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Abdominoplasty;
Thrombosis;
Venous thrombosis;
Thromboembolism;
Enoxaparin
- MeSH:
Abdominoplasty*;
Body Mass Index;
Chemoprevention;
Drainage;
Enoxaparin;
Hematoma;
Hemostasis;
Humans;
Mortality;
Pulmonary Embolism;
Risk Assessment;
Risk Factors;
Surgery, Plastic;
Thromboembolism;
Thrombosis;
Venous Thromboembolism;
Venous Thrombosis
- From:Archives of Plastic Surgery
2016;43(4):360-364
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism, a spectrum of diseases ranging from deep venous thrombosis to pulmonary embolism, is a major source of morbidity and mortality. The majority of cases described in plastic surgery involve abdominoplasty. Risk assessment and prophylaxis are paramount in such patients. General recommendations were recently developed, but the evidence in the literature was insufficient to prepare exhaustive guidelines regarding the medication, dosage, timing, or length of the prophylaxis. METHODS: A thromboprophylaxis protocol was developed for patients undergoing abdominoplasty. The protocol consisted of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative measures. Enoxaparin was administered as chemoprophylaxis in selected patients. The study involved 253 patients. The patients were analyzed for age, body mass index, enoxaparin dosage, risk factors, and complications. RESULTS: Deep venous thrombosis was documented in two cases (0.8%). No pulmonary embolism occurred. Three patients (1.2%) presented mild subcutaneous abdominal hematoma within the first postoperative week that spontaneously resorbed with neither aesthetic nor functional complications. Two patients (0.8%) presented severe hematoma requiring surgical re-intervention for drainage and hemostasis revision. Statistical analysis showed no significant correlation between enoxaparin dosage and hematoma (P=0.18) or deep venous thrombosis (P=0.61). CONCLUSIONS: The described thromboprophylaxis protocol proved to be effective in the prevention of thrombotic events, with an acceptable risk of hemorrhagic complications. Furthermore, it provides new evidence regarding the currently debated variables of chemoprophylaxis, namely type, dosage, timing, and length.
