| Title |
Prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing bariatric surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Vascular Health and Risk Management, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/vhrm.s73799 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew A Bartlett, Karen F Mauck, Paul R Daniels |
| Abstract |
Bariatric surgical procedures are now a common method of obesity treatment with established effectiveness. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) events, which include deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, are an important source of postoperative morbidity and mortality among bariatric surgery patients. Due to an understanding of the frequency and seriousness of these complications, bariatric surgery patients typically receive some method of VTE prophylaxis with lower extremity compression, pharmacologic prophylaxis, or both. However, the optimal approach in these patients is unclear, with multiple open questions. In particular, strategies of adjusted-dose heparins, postdischarge anticoagulant prophylaxis, and the role of vena cava filters have been evaluated, but only to a limited extent. In contrast to other types of operations, the literature regarding VTE prophylaxis in bariatric surgery is notable for a dearth of prospective, randomized clinical trials, and current professional guidelines reflect the uncertainties in this literature. Herein, we summarize the available evidence after systematic review of the literature regarding approaches to VTE prevention in bariatric surgery. Identification of risk factors for VTE in the bariatric surgery population, analysis of the effectiveness of methods used for prophylaxis, and an overview of published guidelines are presented. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 127 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 25 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Other | 27 | 21% |
| Unknown | 20 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 78 | 61% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 28 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,274,768
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#240
of 808 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,813
of 276,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#9
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 808 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,796 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.