Managing hip fracture and lower limb surgery in the emergency setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trauma, immobilization, and subsequent surgery of the hip and lower limb are associated with a high risk of developing venous thrombo-embolism (VTE). Individuals undergoing hip fracture surgery (HFS) have the highest rates of VTE among orthopedic surgery and trauma patients. The risk of VTE depends on the type and location of the lower limb injury. Current international guidelines recommend routine pharmacological thromboprophylaxis based on treatment with heparins, fondaparinux, dose-adjusted vitamin K antagonists and acetylsalicylic acid for patients undergoing emergency HFS; however, not all guidelines recommend pharmacological prophylaxis for patients with lower limb injuries. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are indicated for VTE prevention after elective hip or knee replacement surgery, but at present are not widely recommended for other orthopedic indications despite their advantages over conventional anticoagulants and promising real-world evidence. In patients undergoing HFS or lower limb surgery, decisions on whether to anticoagulate and the most appropriate anti-coagulation strategy can be guided by weighing the risk of thromboprophylaxis against the benefit in relation to each patient's medical history and age. In addition, the nature and location of the fracture, operating times and times before fracture fixation should be considered. The current review discusses the need for anticoagulation in patients undergoing emergency HFS or lower limb surgery together with the current guidelines and available evidence on the use of NOACs in this setting. Appropriate thromboprophylactic strategies and practical advice on the peri-operative management of patients who present to the Emergency Department on a NOAC before emergency surgery are further outlined.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".