Aspirin is as effective as low molecular weight heparins in preventing symptomatic venous thromboembolism following arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The optimal agent for thromboprophylaxis following arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains unclear, particularly in patients with a low baseline risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). This retrospective cohort study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of aspirin versus low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) in this specific patient population. METHODS: We analyzed data from patients who underwent ACLR between March 2016 and March 2021, focusing on those with a low risk for VTE. High-risk individuals, identified by factors such as cardiac disease, pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, previous VTE, inflammatory bowel disease, active cancer, and a BMI > 40, were excluded (n = 33). Our approach included a thorough review of medical charts, surgical reports, and pre-operative assessments, complemented by telephone follow-up conducted over a 3-month period by a single investigator. We assessed the incidence of symptomatic VTE, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary thromboembolism, as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes included to complications related to the surgery and thromboprophylaxis. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, univariate logistic regression models, and calculations of incidence rates. RESULT: In our study, 761 patients (761 knees) were included, with 458 (60.18%) receiving aspirin and 303 (39.82%) receiving LMWH. The two groups showed no significant differences in demographic factors except for age. The incidence of VTE was reported at 1.31% (10 individuals). Specifically, five patients in the aspirin group (1.09%) and five patients in the LMWH group (1.65%) developed a symptomatic VTE event (p = 0.53). Additionally, the two groups did not significantly differ in terms of other complications, such as hemarthrosis or surgical site infection (p > 0.05). Logistic regression analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in VTE risk between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This study, focusing on isolated ACLR in patients with a low baseline risk for venous thromboembolism, demonstrated that aspirin is equally effective as low molecular weight heparins for VTE prophylaxis following this surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".