Download PDF
Thromb Haemost 1985; 53(02): 239-241
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1661283
Original Article
Schattauer GmbH Stuttgart

Prevention of Postoperative Thromboembolism in Sweden – The Development of Practice During Five Years

David Bergqvist
The Department of Surgery, General Hospital, Malmö, Sweden
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received 15 November 1984

Accepted 31 January 1985

Publication Date:
18 July 2018 (online)

  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Summary

All climes in Sweden (223) dealing with general, urologie, orthopaedic, and gynaecologic surgery were sent a questionnaire concerning their policy about prophylaxis against postoperative thromboembolism in 1982. The praxis was also compared with that obtained in a similar survey in 1977. 96% replied. 91% used some sort of specific prophylaxis which is significantly more than in 1977. Also a significantly larger number of patients were operated on with prophylaxis than in 1977 (25 vs 19%). The dominating methods were dextran 70 and low-dose heparin. Compared with 1977 peroral anticoagulation, low-dose heparin and mechanical methods had decreased significantly, low-dose heparin in combination with dihydroergotamine increased significantly and dextran showed an unchanged use.

Keywords

Thromboembolism - Prophylaxis - Survey
 

  • References

  • 1 Bergqvist D. Prevention of postoperative deep vein thrombosis in Swedenesults. Result of a survey World J Surg 1980; 4: 489-495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Nicolaides AN, Field ES, Kakkar VV, Yates-Bell AJ, Taylor S, Clarke MB. Prostatectomy and deep-vein thrombosis. Br J Surg 1972; 59: 487-488
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hedlund PO. Postoperative venous thrombosis in benign prostatic disease. A study of 316 patients with the 125I-fibrinogen uptake testz. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1975 Suppl 27
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Gruber UF. Prevention of fatal postoperative pulmonary embolism by heparin dihydroergotamine or dextran 70. Br J Surg 1982; 69: S54-S58
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wille-Jørgensen P, Jørgensen T. Tromboseprophylakse i Danmark. Resultat af en enqueteundersøgelse Ugeskr Laeger 1982; 144: 1600-1602
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kettunen K. Leikkauksen jälkeisen tromboembolian ennaltaehkäisy Suomessa. Suomen Lääkärilehti 1981; 36: 2907
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kobel M, Krähenbuhl B. Enquête surla prévention de la thrombose veineuse profonde en chirurgie. Schweiz Med Wchschr 1982; 112: 148-153
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Morris GK, Mitchell JR A. Prevention and diagnosis of venous thrombosis in patients with hip fractures. A survey of current praxis Lancet 1976; 2: 867-869
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Morris GK. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. A survey of methods used by orthopaedic and general surgeons Lancet 1980; 2: 572-574
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Simon T, Stengle J. Antithrombotic practice in orthopaedic surgery. Results of a survey Clin Orthop Rel Res 1974; 102: 181-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Conti S. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in the surgical patient: a regional survey. Vase Surg 1980; 14: 382
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Conti S, Daschbach M. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. A survey of its use in the United States Arch Surg 1982; 117: 1036-1040
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Bergqvist D. Dextran and haemostasis. A review Acta Chir Scand 1982; 148: 633-640
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Renck H, Ljungström K-G, Hedin H, Richter W. Prevention of dextran-induced anaphylactic reactions by hapten inhibition. III. A Scandinavian multicenter study on the effects of 20 ml dextran 1, 15%, administered before dextran 70 or dextran 40. Acta Chir Scand 1983; 149: 355-360
    PubMedGoogle Scholar