12 Future research needs for venous thrombo-embolic disease in obstetrics and gynaecology

MBChB, MRCOG, Msc(Epid) Peter Brocklehurst (Unit Epidemiologist)
{"title":"12 Future research needs for venous thrombo-embolic disease in obstetrics and gynaecology","authors":"MBChB, MRCOG, Msc(Epid) Peter Brocklehurst (Unit Epidemiologist)","doi":"10.1016/S0950-3552(97)80030-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The clinical management of thrombo-embolic disease in obstetrics and gynaecology is hampered by the paucity of firm evidence on which to base clinical decisions. This is particularly so in obstetrics where there have been no randomized controlled trials of thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy or the puerperium of sufficient size to detect differences in the incidence of clinical thrombo-embolic events. The incidence of osteoporosis and bleeding complications associated with heparin have not been precisely defined in pregnancy and we are already using low-molecular-weight heparin in place of unfractionated heparin when we do not know whether either heparin is preferable to nothing. In gynaecology, the various thromboprophylactic modalities for use in relation to surgery need to be compared. The small randomized comparisons that have been performed suggest that relatively non-invasive procedures may be just as effective as heparin in preventing thrombo-embolism without the associated complications. Recent controversies concerning the effect of the OCP and HRT on the risk of thrombo-embolic disease indicate that the present methods we use to evaluate these interventions needs to be urgently addressed so that safety rather than efficacy becomes the principle outcome.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":77031,"journal":{"name":"Bailliere's clinical obstetrics and gynaecology","volume":"11 3","pages":"Pages 601-610"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0950-3552(97)80030-2","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bailliere's clinical obstetrics and gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950355297800302","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The clinical management of thrombo-embolic disease in obstetrics and gynaecology is hampered by the paucity of firm evidence on which to base clinical decisions. This is particularly so in obstetrics where there have been no randomized controlled trials of thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy or the puerperium of sufficient size to detect differences in the incidence of clinical thrombo-embolic events. The incidence of osteoporosis and bleeding complications associated with heparin have not been precisely defined in pregnancy and we are already using low-molecular-weight heparin in place of unfractionated heparin when we do not know whether either heparin is preferable to nothing. In gynaecology, the various thromboprophylactic modalities for use in relation to surgery need to be compared. The small randomized comparisons that have been performed suggest that relatively non-invasive procedures may be just as effective as heparin in preventing thrombo-embolism without the associated complications. Recent controversies concerning the effect of the OCP and HRT on the risk of thrombo-embolic disease indicate that the present methods we use to evaluate these interventions needs to be urgently addressed so that safety rather than efficacy becomes the principle outcome.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
产科和妇科静脉血栓栓塞性疾病的未来研究需要
产科和妇科血栓栓塞性疾病的临床管理受到缺乏临床决策依据的确凿证据的阻碍。这在产科尤其如此,因为在妊娠期或产褥期没有足够大的血栓预防的随机对照试验来检测临床血栓栓塞事件发生率的差异。与肝素相关的骨质疏松症和出血并发症的发生率在妊娠期还没有精确的定义,当我们不知道哪一种肝素是否比不服用肝素更好时,我们已经在使用低分子肝素来代替未分离肝素。在妇科,与手术相关的各种血栓预防方式需要进行比较。已经进行的小型随机比较表明,相对非侵入性手术在预防血栓栓塞方面可能与肝素一样有效,且没有相关并发症。最近关于OCP和HRT对血栓栓塞性疾病风险的影响的争议表明,我们目前用于评估这些干预措施的方法需要迫切解决,以便安全性而不是有效性成为主要结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Prolapse. Vaginal hysterectomy. Contributors to this issue Preface 3 Adverse effects of luteinizing hormone on fertility: fact or fantasy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1