Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 41527456

Risk factors of venous thromboembolism in ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify risk factors associated with the development of VTE in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to 25 April 2025, to identify studies examining the association between risk factors and the occurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in ICU patients. Data were pooled using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 2465 relevant studies were identified through the systematic search, of which 30 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled data showed that the following were significant risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in ICU patients: central venous catheterization (OR = 2.67, 95% CI: 1.67-4.28; I2 = 28%), invasive mechanical ventilation (OR = 2.08, 95% CI: 1.46-2.96; I2 = 0%), advanced age (OR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.28-3.31; I2 = 86%), length of ICU stay (OR = 4.24, 95% CI: 1.43-12.57; I2 = 98%), malignancy (OR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.03-5.12; I2 = 67%), elevated D-dimer levels (OR = 2.46, 95% CI: 1.37-4.40; I2 = 34%), and a history of VTE (OR = 2.84, 95% CI: 1.45-5.55; I2 = 51%). According to the GRADE assessment, the quality of evidence was rated as moderate for invasive mechanical ventilation, low for central venous catheterization and D-dimer levels, and very low for the remaining factors. CONCLUSION: Invasive mechanical ventilation, central venous catheterization, and elevated D-dimer levels are associated with VTE risk, supported by relatively high-quality evidence. These findings may help identify ICU patients at higher risk of VTE, inform the development of risk assessment models for patient stratification, and ultimately contribute to improved prognosis through optimal screening and management strategies.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Xiaoli Yang, Xiaoli Zhou, Yuehong Qiu. 2026-01-13. Risk factors of venous thromboembolism in ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2026.2614222

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) vs. non-PCC strategies for warfarin reversal in left ventricular assist device recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) prolong survival in end-stage heart failure, and warfarin thromboprophylaxis is recommended to prevent device thrombosis and thromboembolic complications. When bleeding occurs or emergency surgery is required, rapid anticoagulation reversal is critical. Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) provides rapid reversal; however, its risk-benefit profile in LVAD recipients remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing PCC with non-PCC strategies for warfarin reversal in LVAD recipients. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were searched through June 2025 for studies of PCC versus non-PCC strategies for warfarin reversal in LVAD recipients. Two reviewers independently extracted data. Random-effects models were used to pool arm-level estimates and to pool head-to-head comparisons using mean differences or risk ratios (RRs). RESULTS: Eighteen studies involving 779 patients were included. Arm-level pooled estimates for PCC versus non-PCC comparators were 24.0% versus 15.8% for mortality, 16.5% versus 12.1% for thrombotic events, and 3.1 versus 5.7 for FFP units. Arm-level time to INR correction was longer with PCC overall (16.5 versus 13.6 h), driven by one elective cohort, but faster within the ICH subgroup (6.0 versus 13.7 h). In head-to-head comparisons, PCC achieved faster INR correction than non-PCC comparators (mean difference - 7.6 h; p = 0.001) and required fewer FFP units (-2.6 units; p = 0.019), with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.14; p = 0.490) or thrombotic events (RR 1.43; p = 0.176). CONCLUSIONS: In head-to-head studies, PCC was associated with faster INR correction and lower FFP requirements than non-PCC strategies, whereas mortality and thrombotic events did not differ significantly. Given the observational evidence, wide confidence intervals, and heterogeneity, equivalent safety cannot be established, and prospective studies are needed to define the relative safety and effectiveness of the two approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: PCC-based strategies may be considered for urgent warfarin reversal in LVAD recipients, particularly when rapid INR reduction or avoidance of large-volume plasma transfusion is clinically important. Treatment decisions should account for the indication, bleeding severity, and underlying thrombotic risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42024573925.

Humans

Early mobilization within 24 to 48 h improves postoperative clinical outcomes in older adults with hip fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is a major public health concern among older adults, often resulting in prolonged disability, institutionalization, and increased healthcare burden. Early mobilization has been widely recommended to enhance postoperative recovery; however, there is a lack of consolidated evidence quantifying its impact on clinical and functional outcomes. This study aimed to synthesize and evaluate the impact of early mobilization following hip fracture surgery in older adults and to explore potential sources of heterogeneity to better inform clinical and nursing practice. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across seven databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, and Emcare) from inception to June 15, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and observational cohort studies comparing early mobilization (defined as ambulation within 24 to 48&#xa0;h postoperatively) to delayed or usual mobilization in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Primary outcomes included mortality, discharge destination, and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, functional recovery, and readmission. Risk of bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies involving 297,435 patients were included. Compared with delayed mobilization, early mobilization significantly reduced 30-day mortality (relative risk&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.40, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.64) and 1-year mortality (relative risk&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.57, 95% confidence interval: 0.40-0.80) (both p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.05). In regional analyses of pooled mortality, similar reductions were observed across Asia-Pacific, North America, and Europe. Patients receiving early mobilization were more likely to be discharged home and had shorter hospital stays. Early mobilization also resulted in a reduced risk of postoperative complications (relative risk&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.79, 95% confidence interval: 0.74-0.84, p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.05), with specific improvements in pneumonia and thromboembolism rates. Functional independence was significantly improved, as shown by higher Barthel Index scores and increased odds of achieving Functional Independence Measure &#x2265;5 at discharge. No significant difference was observed in readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: lization within 24 to 48&#xa0;h following hip fracture surgery was associated with favorable outcomes, including reduced mortality, improved functional independence, higher rates of discharge to home, shorter hospital length of stay, and fewer postoperative complications. Although heterogeneity across studies and the predominance of observational evidence warrant cautious interpretation, these findings support current recommendations for early mobilization and highight the potential value of structured and standardized mobilization protocols in routine postoperative hip fracture care.

Humans

Retrosigmoid craniotomy surgical guide: The way forward for precise exposure of the transverse-sigmoid sinuses.

INTRODUCTION: The retrosigmoid craniotomy is the workhorse approach to the cerebellopontine angle. Accurate localisation of the transverse-sigmoid junction (TSJ) is key for optimised exposure and cerebellar retraction. Various methods, both anatomical and navigational, have been used but with suboptimal results. We utilised a 3D-printed retrosigmoid surgical guide in an attempt to overcome this and report our early outcomes and experiences in the design, production and utilisation of the guide. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of the patients with retrosigmoid craniotomies performed using the surgical guides. Patient demographics and diagnoses, along with the accuracy of the planned burrhole and craniotomy, need for craniotomy extension, presence of venous sinus injury, set-up time, and cost were reported. RESULTS: There were ten cerebellopontine angle cases in which the surgical guides were utilised, three petrous meningiomas, two trigeminal neuralgias, two metastasis, and three other tumours. The planned burrhole and craniotomy were precise in all cases with accurate exposure of the TSJ and no requirement for craniotomy extension. The mean set up time was 3.9&#xa0;min, and the mean cost of the surgical guides was USD 470.90. One elderly patient had an intraoperative transverse sinus injury related to adherent dura that was planned for exposure. CONCLUSION: The 3D-printed surgical guide is a potential solution to the rapid, precise and consistent identification of the TSJ when performing a retrosigmoid craniotomy. We present our early experience and discuss nuances in the designing, production, and intraoperative phases to optimise the precision of this guide. We suggest two methods to avoid sinus injury in elderly patients: either to plan the craniotomy to the edge of the sinus, or to plan sinus exposure but to use burr drills rather than the osteotome, as in our case, to expose the sinus.

Humans