Venous Thromboembolism Events After Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic literature review focused on hip arthroscopy was to (1) report the venous thromboembolism (VTE) event incidence in patients who receive VTE prophylaxis and those who do not, (2) report how VTE prophylaxis is currently being administered, and (3) report operative and patient-related risk factors for VTE identified in the literature. METHODS: The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed were searched from database inception to October 10, 2016, and screened in duplicate for relevant studies. Data were collected regarding VTE prophylaxis, traction use, surgical time, VTE incidence, patient and operative factors, and postoperative weight bearing and rehabilitation. Study quality was assessed in duplicate with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. RESULTS: Outcome analyses included 14 studies that involved 2,850 patients (2,985 hips). The weighted mean follow-up period was 19 ± 8 months, ranging from 7 days to 103 months. The weighted mean age was 40.7 ± 7 years, ranging from 6 to 82 years, and 39.6% of patients were male patients. The overall weighted proportion of VTE events after hip arthroscopy found in 14 included studies was 2.0% (95% confidence interval, 0.01%-4.1%), with 25 VTE events. Several studies reported patient risk factors, which included increased age, increased body mass index, prolonged traction time, and use of oral contraceptives. CONCLUSIONS: The use and efficacy of VTE prophylaxis are highly under-reported within hip arthroscopy. The low incidence of VTE events found in this review (2.0%) suggests that prophylaxis may not be necessary in low-risk patients undergoing hip arthroscopy; however, the true rate may be under-reported. Current literature suggests that prophylaxis is typically not prescribed. Early mobility and postoperative rehabilitation may also help to further mitigate the risk of VTE events, but use of these strategies needs further prospective evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II through IV studies.
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 | 0.008 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".