7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Lipoaspiración en cirugía plástica: factores de riesgo para tromboembolismo. Revisión bibliográfica Translated title: Liposuction in plastic surgery: risk factors for thromboembolism. Bibliographic review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Resumen Introducción y objetivo. La liposucción es la segunda cirugía más frecuente en Cirugía Plástica Estética. Dentro de sus complicaciones mayores se encuentra la trombosis venosa profunda (prevalencia del 0.06%), mientras que el tromboembolismo pulmonar representa el 23% de las muertes en lipoaspiración. Si bien existen diferentes escalas para estratificar el riesgo de trombosis, siendo el más conocido el de índice de Caprini (año 2005), ninguno es específico para la lipoaspiración. Nuestro objetivo es realizar una revisión bibliográfica sobre la estratificación de riesgo de enfermedad tromboembólica venosa en pacientes de Cirugía Plástica Estética a los que se realiza lipoaspiración, con el fin de generar evidencia científica que contribuya a la toma de decisiones por parte de los cirujanos plásticos. Material y método. Revisión narrativa mediante una búsqueda bibliográfica en Pubmed y Google Scholar con las palabras clave “thromboembolism”, “thrombosis” y “liposuction”, de los artículos publicados en los últimos 5 años. Las variables analizadas fueron factores de riesgo incluidos en Caprini 2005 además de otros factores analizados para lipoaspiracion, no incluidos en Caprini 2005. Resultados. Obtuvimos un total de 11 artículos que describen para cirugías de lipoaspiración los siguientes factores de riesgo incluidos en Caprini 2005: edad, terapia de reemplazo hormonal, historia familiar de trombosis, índice de masa corporal y tiempo quirúrgico. Además, mencionan los siguientes factores no incluidos en Caprini: volumen lipoaspirado, tipo de anestesia, género del paciente, lugar de la cirugía y asociación de procedimientos. Conclusiones. Es limitada la cantidad de artículos que analizan la influencia de los factores de riesgo para enfermedad tromboembólica venosa únicamente en lipoaspiración. Si bien Caprini 2005 es un método aceptado para estratificar el riesgo individual, consideramos que se deben tener en cuenta además factores de riesgo descritos para lipoaspiración que no aparecen en dicho índice.

          Translated abstract

          Abstract Background and objective. Liposuction is the second most frequent surgery in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Among its major complications is deep vein thrombosis (prevalence of 0.06%), while pulmonary thromboembolism represents 23% of deaths in liposuction. Although there are different scales to stratify the risk of thrombosis, the best known being the Caprini score (year 2005), none is specific for liposuction. Our objective is to carry out a bibliographic review on the risk stratification of venous thromboembolic disease in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery patients who underwent liposuction, in order to generate scientific evidence that contributes to the decision-making of plastic surgeons. Methods. Narrative review through a bibliographic search carried out in Pubmed and Google Scholar with the keywords "thromboembolism", "thrombosis" and "liposuction" of the articles published in the last 5 years. The variables analyzed were risk factors included in Caprini 2005, in addition to other factors analyzed for liposuction not included in Caprini 2005. Results. We obtained a total of 11 articles which describe the following risk factors for liposuction surgeries included in Caprini 2005: age, hormone replacement therapy, family history of thrombosis, body mass index and surgical time. In addition, they mention the following factors not included in Caprini: lipoaspirated volume, type of anesthesia, patient gender, place of surgery and association of procedures. Conclusions. The number of articles that analyze the influence of risk factors for venous thromboembolic disease only in liposuction is limited. Although Caprini 2005 is an accepted method to stratify the individual risk of patients for liposuction, we believe that the risk factors described for liposuction that do not appear in said score should also be considered.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prevention of VTE in nonorthopedic surgical patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

          VTE is a common cause of preventable death in surgical patients. We developed recommendations for thromboprophylaxis in nonorthopedic surgical patients by using systematic methods as described in Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines. Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines in this supplement. We describe several alternatives for stratifying the risk of VTE in general and abdominal-pelvic surgical patients. When the risk for VTE is very low (< 0.5%), we recommend that no specific pharmacologic (Grade 1B) or mechanical (Grade 2C) prophylaxis be used other than early ambulation. For patients at low risk for VTE (∼1.5%), we suggest mechanical prophylaxis, preferably with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC), over no prophylaxis (Grade 2C). For patients at moderate risk for VTE (∼3%) who are not at high risk for major bleeding complications, we suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) (Grade 2B), low-dose unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B), or mechanical prophylaxis with IPC (Grade 2C) over no prophylaxis. For patients at high risk for VTE (∼6%) who are not at high risk for major bleeding complications, we recommend pharmacologic prophylaxis with LMWH (Grade 1B) or low-dose unfractionated heparin (Grade 1B) over no prophylaxis. In these patients, we suggest adding mechanical prophylaxis with elastic stockings or IPC to pharmacologic prophylaxis (Grade 2C). For patients at high risk for VTE undergoing abdominal or pelvic surgery for cancer, we recommend extended-duration, postoperative, pharmacologic prophylaxis (4 weeks) with LMWH over limited-duration prophylaxis (Grade 1B). For patients at moderate to high risk for VTE who are at high risk for major bleeding complications or those in whom the consequences of bleeding are believed to be particularly severe, we suggest use of mechanical prophylaxis, preferably with IPC, over no prophylaxis until the risk of bleeding diminishes and pharmacologic prophylaxis may be initiated (Grade 2C). For patients in all risk groups, we suggest that an inferior vena cava filter not be used for primary VTE prevention (Grade 2C) and that surveillance with venous compression ultrasonography should not be performed (Grade 2C). We developed similar recommendations for other nonorthopedic surgical populations. Optimal thromboprophylaxis in nonorthopedic surgical patients will consider the risks of VTE and bleeding complications as well as the values and preferences of individual patients.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Thrombosis risk assessment as a guide to quality patient care.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A validation study of a retrospective venous thromboembolism risk scoring method.

              Validate a retrospective venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk scoring method, which was developed at the University of Michigan Health System and based on the Caprini risk assessment model, and assess the confounding effects of VTE prophylaxis. Assessing patients for risk of VTE is essential to initiating appropriate prophylaxis and reducing the mortality and morbidity associated with deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. VTE risk factors were identified for 8216 inpatients from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program using the retrospective scoring method. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) for VTE within 30 days after surgery for risk factors and risk level. A bivariate probit model estimated the effects of risk while controlling for adherence to prophylaxis guidelines. Distribution of the study population by risk level was highest, 52.1%; high, 36.5%; moderate, 10.4%; and low, 0.9%. Incidence of VTE within 30 days was overall 1.4%; by risk level: highest, 1.94%; high, 0.97%; moderate, 0.70%; low, 0%. Controlling for length of hospitalization (>2 d) and fiscal year, pregnancy or postpartum (OR = 8.3; 1.0-68, P < 0.05), recent sepsis (4.0; 1.4-10.9, P < 0.01), malignancy (2.3; 1.5-3.3, P < 0.01), history of VTE (2.1; 1.1-4.1, P < 0.05), and central venous access (1.8; 1.1-3.0, P < 0.05) were significantly associated with VTE. Risk level was significantly associated with VTE (1.9; 1.3-2.6, P < 0.01). The bivariate probit demonstrated significant correlation between the probability of VTE and lack of adherence to prophylaxis guidelines (rho = 0.299, P = 0.013). The retrospective risk scoring method is valid and supports use of individual patient assessment of risk for VTE within 30 days after surgery.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                cpil
                Cirugía Plástica Ibero-Latinoamericana
                Cir. plást. iberolatinoam.
                Sociedad Española de Cirugía Plástica, Reparadora y Estética (SECPRE) (Madrid, Madrid, Spain )
                0376-7892
                1989-2055
                December 2022
                : 48
                : 4
                : 423-432
                Affiliations
                [2] Montevideo orgnameHospital Pasteur orgdiv1Hospital de Clínicas y Servicio de Cirugía Plástica y Microcirugía orgdiv2Cátedra de Cirugía Plástica, Reparadora y Estética Uruguay
                [3] Montevideo orgnameHospital Pasteur orgdiv1Hospital de Clínicas y Servicio de Cirugía Plástica y Microcirugía orgdiv2Cátedra de Cirugía Plástica, Reparadora y Estética Uruguay
                [4] Granada orgnameHospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves España
                [1] Montevideo orgnameHospital Pasteur orgdiv1Hospital de Clínicas y Servicio de Cirugía Plástica y Microcirugía orgdiv2Cátedra de Cirugía Plástica, Reparadora y Estética Uruguay
                Article
                S0376-78922022000400009 S0376-7892(22)04800400009
                10.4321/s0376-78922022000400009
                8361762b-8d2a-45c4-b5d1-0823555b5223

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 08 June 2022
                : 15 November 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 28, Pages: 10
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Estética

                Thromboembolism,Thrombosis,Liposuction,Tromboembolismo,Trombosis,Liposucción

                Comments

                Comment on this article