Skip to main content
Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis logoLink to Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
. 2019 Apr 24;25:1076029619845066. doi: 10.1177/1076029619845066

Incidence and Risk Factors of Deep Vein Thrombosis in Patients With Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures

Pengfei Wang 1, Utku Kandemir 2, Binfei Zhang 1, Baohui Wang 1, Jiahao Li 3, Yan Zhuang 1, Hu Wang 1, Hong Zhang 4, Ping Liu 1,, Kun Zhang 1,
PMCID: PMC6714909  PMID: 31014089

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures. Patients with pelvic or acetabular fractures were included. Demographic data, fracture classification, time to surgery, and d-dimer levels at admission and one day after surgical intervention were recorded. Duplex ultrasonography was performed in the lower extremities for DVT evaluation. All patients received mechanical and chemical thromboprophylaxis. One hundred ten patients with a mean age of 44.2 ± 13.8 years were included. There were 48 patients with pelvic fractures and 62 patients with acetabular fractures. Thirty-two (29.09%) patients sustained DVT; 21 (19.09%) patients exhibited proximal thrombosis, and 3 patients suffered pulmonary embolism. The incidence of DVT in patients with acetabular fractures was significantly higher than that of patients with pelvic fractures (χ2 = 4.42, P = .04). The incidence of proximal DVT was significantly higher in patients with complex acetabular fractures than in patients with simple acetabular fractures (χ2 = 6.65, P = .01). Multivariate analysis showed that age older than 60 years, associated injuries, and the time to surgery longer than 2 weeks were independent risk factors (P < .05). Despite mechanical and chemical thromboprophylaxis, the risk of DVT in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures is still very high, and most of the thromboses were localized proximally. The risk of DVT is higher in patients older than 60 years, in those with associated injuries, and when the time from injury to operation is more than 2 weeks.

Keywords: pelvic, acetabular, fracture, deep vein thrombosis, risk factors

Introduction

Pelvic and acetabular fractures are common following high-energy trauma, and their management remains challenging.14 Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), are among the most fearful complications associated with these fractures.5,6

In the absence of thromboprophylaxis, the incidence of DVT in patients with pelvic fractures is variable, up to 61%,7 while that of asymptomatic DVT is reported to be 15% to 68%.8,9 However, even with anticoagulation, the incidence of DVT ranges from 3% to 30.5% in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures,1013 with approximately 50% of those being pelvic (proximal) in origin.14,15

While anticoagulation therapy is necessary to prevent VTE, it can cause bleeding and prolonged length of hospital stay or readmission, resulting in increased cost.1618 Most studies on VTE focus on hip and knee arthroplasty and hip fractures. However, the incidence and risk factors of VTE in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures who routinely received thromboprophylaxis are rarely reported in the Asian population.11 This prospective study was performed to analyze the incidence and risk factors of DVT in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures in a cohort of consecutive patients.

Materials and Methods

The institutional review board approved the study. This prospective, single-center study was conducted at our level 1 trauma center from August 2015 to December 2016. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with pelvic and/or acetabular fractures; (2) age older than 18 years. The exclusion criteria were (1) pathological fractures, (2) anticoagulation before injury, and (3) fractures associated with an open injury that required emergency surgical intervention.

After admission, all patients were placed on mechanical thromboprophylaxis (intermittent pneumatic compression device). Chemical prophylaxis was administered with low molecular weight heparin for prophylaxis (4100 U once a day, GlaxoSmithKline Co, Brentford, United Kingdom). For patients with hemodynamic instability, chemical prophylaxis was administered once stable. Deep vein thrombosis screening of the lower extremities was performed with duplex ultrasonography (DUS) before and after surgery. Patients diagnosed with DVT were administered low molecular weight heparin at therapeutic dose (4100 U, twice a day), and mechanical thromboprophylaxis was stopped immediately. Patients diagnosed with proximal DVT (popliteal vein or more proximal) underwent preoperative placement of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter. Computed tomography (CT) arteriography was conducted in patients with suspected PE. After discharge, rivaroxaban (Bayer, Leverkusen, Germany) with 10 mg once a day was administered for prophylaxis until 5 weeks after surgery. Rivaroxaban with 15 mg twice a day was administered until 3 weeks followed by 20 mg once a day until 5 weeks after surgery for therapeutic dose. All fractures were classified by 2 senior pelvic surgeons (K.Z and Y.Z) based on their review of X-rays and CT scans. Combined pelvic and acetabular fractures were classified into one type (pelvic or acetabular fractures) according to which one was predominant. Two senior pelvic and acetabular surgeons (K.Z and Y.Z) performed all operations.

The following data were collected: (1) demographics: gender, age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, and the time from injury to surgery; (2) the type of fracture: pelvic fractures were classified per Young-Burgess classification,19 and acetabular fractures were classified per Judet-Letournel classification20; (3) associated injuries; (4) injury severity score (ISS); (5) surgical approach; (6) blood transfusion; and (7) d-dimer levels.

Screening for DVT with DUS is routinely performed at our institution for all trauma patients. One senior sonographer (ZH) performed DUS of the bilateral lower extremities before and after surgery with Philips IU 22 duplex scanners (Royal Phillips Electronics, Amsterdam, the Netherlands). The criteria of positivity for VTE included noncompressibility, the presence of intraluminal defect, an absent or a nonphasic Doppler signal, lack of respiratory variation above the knee segments, and inadequate flow augmentation to calf and foot compression maneuvers.21 Deep vein thrombosis was classified as proximal if it was localized in the popliteal vein or proximally. Distal DVT was defined as thrombosis localized distal to the popliteal vein. Patients who had DVT in both distal and proximal veins were classified in the proximal DVT group.

The blood samples were tested by an automatic blood coagulation analyzer (CA1500, Sysmex Corporation, Japan). d-dimer levels were measured at 2 hours after admission and one day after surgery. The positive threshold of the d-dimer level was more than 1.4 mg/L.

Statistical Analysis

The Statistical Package for Social Sciences software version 19 (IBM, Chicago, Illinois) was used. The data are presented as the means and standard deviations except where noted. χ2 and Fisher exact tests were performed for the categorical variables as appropriate. Comparisons between intergroups were performed using Student t test for continuous variables. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent associations between various risk factors and DVTs. A P value of <.05 was defined as statistically significant.

Results

One hundred ten patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures were included. The mean age was 44.2 ± 13.8 years (range: 18-76); 76 were males and 34 were females. Forty-eight patients sustained pelvic fractures (anterior–posterior compression [APC] type in 12 patients, lateral compression [LC] type in 16 patients, vertical shear [VS] type in 20 patients), and 62 patients sustained acetabular fractures (simple fracture type in 26 patients, complex fracture type in 36 patients).

The Incidence of DVT

Overall, 29.09% (32/110) of patients were diagnosed with DVT. Proximal DVT was detected in 21 (19.09%) patients. Three (2.73%) patients had PE and proximal DVT simultaneously. Distal DVT was detected in 11 (10.0%) patients.

Deep vein thrombosis was diagnosed in 18.75% (9/48) of patients with pelvic fractures and in 37.10% (23/62) of patients with acetabular fractures. There was a significant difference in the rate of DVT between the pelvic fracture group and acetabular fracture group (χ2 = 4.423, P = .041). Proximal DVT was detected in 12.50% (6/48) of patients with pelvic fractures and in 24.19% (15/62) of patients with acetabular fractures. There was no significant difference between these 2 groups (χ2 = 2.404, P = .118).

No DVT was diagnosed in the 12 patients with APC type pelvic fractures. Deep vein thrombosis was detected in 12.50% (2/16) of patients with LC type pelvic fractures and in 35% (7/20) of patients with VS type pelvic fractures. The rate of DVT was significantly higher in patients with LC type and VS type pelvis fractures than in those with APC type fractures (χ2 = 6.646, P = .036). The incidence of DVT in the VS type group was significantly greater than that in the LC type group (χ2 = 4.317, P = .025).

Deep vein thrombosis was detected in 23.08% (6/26) of patients with simple acetabular fractures, and 7.69% (2/26) had proximal DVT. Deep vein thrombosis was detected in 47.22% (17/36) of patients with complex acetabular fractures, and 36.11% (13/36) had proximal DVT. There was a significant difference in the overall incidence of DVT between the simple acetabular fracture group and the complex acetabular fracture group (χ2 = 3.776, P = .047) and in the incidence of proximal DVT between the 2 groups (χ2 = 6.645, P = .008). The incidence of DVT in all patients is described in detail in Table 1.

Table 1.

The Incidence of DVT and Proximal DVT in Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures.

Classification Incidence of DVT (%) Incidence of proximal DVT (%)
Pelvic fractures 9/48 (18.75%) 6/48 (12.50%)
 APC 0/12 (0%) 0/12 (0%)
 LC 2/16 (12.5%) 1/16 (6.25%)
 VS 7/20 (35.00%) 5/20 (25.00%)
Acetabular fractures 23/62 (37.10%) 15/62 (24.19%)
 Simple 6/26 (23.08%) 2/26 (7.69%)
 Complex 17/36 (47.22%) 13/36 (36.11%)

Abbreviations: APC, anterior–posterior compression; DVT, deep vein thrombosis; LC, lateral compression; VS, vertical shear.

Risk Factors for DVT

There was no significant difference in gender, BMI, medical comorbidity, ISS, surgical approach (closed reduction and internal fixation [CRIF] vs open reduction and internal fixation [ORIF]), operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion, or in admission or postoperative d-dimer levels between patients with DVT and without DVT (P > .05). Compared to patients without DVT, patients with DVT were older, had more injuries, and had a longer duration from injury to surgery (P < .05; Table 2).

Table 2.

Univariate Analysis of Perioperative DVT Risk in Patients With Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures.a

DVT (n = 32) Non-DVT (n = 78) Test Statistics P Value
Age 11.683 .014
 ≤60 22 74
 >60 10 4
Gender 3.118 .072
 Male 26 50
 Female 6 28
BMI 0.113 .948
 ≤18 Kg/m2 6 13
 >18∼25 Kg/m2 17 44
 >25 Kg/m2 9 21
Associate injury 9.827 .042
 Chest 6 8
 Abdomen 3 2
 Brain 2 4
 Extremities 10 13
 None 11 51
Comorbidity 1.953 .577
 HT 6 19
 CAD 2 7
 DM 5 6
 None 19 46
ISS 1.353 .509
 ≤16 5 20
 >16 22 46
 >25 5 12
Time from injury to surgery 14.801 .000
 ≤2 weeks 14 63
 >2 weeks 18 15
Surgical approach 0.003 1.001
 ORIF 24 70
 CRIF 4 12
Operation time 0.708 .398
 <2 hours 8 14
 ≥2 hours 24 64
Large amount of blood transfusion 0.012 .924
  Yes 21 52
  No 11 26
d-dimer on admission 1.000
 Positive 32 76
 negative 0 2
d-dimer after operation 1.000
 Positive 32 77
 negative 0 1

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CAD, coronary heart disease; CRIF, closed reduction and internal fixation; DM, diabetes mellitus; DVT, deep vein thrombosis; HT, essential hypertension; ISS, injury severity score; ORIF, open reduction and internal fixation.

aLarge amount of intraoperative blood transfusion means blood transfusion more than 1600 mL totally or transfusion faster than 1.5 mL/(kg·min).

After univariate analyses, the factors with P > .1 were removed, and the factors that met the conditions were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression analysis, including age and time from injury to surgery. The results showed that patients older than 60 years, patients with associated injuries, and time from injury to surgery of more than 2 weeks were independent risk factors for DVT in pelvic and acetabular fractures (Table 3).

Table 3.

Multivariate Analysis of Perioperative DVT Risk in Patients With Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures.

Factor β SE Wald Exp (β) 95% CI P Value
Age >60 3.561 0.523 12.120 10.33 3.96-18.01 .014
Associated with other injuries 3.084 0.251 9.201 10.02 5.71-20.22 .042
Time from injury to surgery >2weeks 5.624 0.493 14.224 27.56 6.45-46.17 .000

Abbreviations: β, beta; CI, confidence interval; DVT, deep vein thrombosis; Exp (β), exponentiation of the β Coefficient; SE, standard error; Wald, Wald test.

Discussion

Deep Vein Thrombosis Incidence of Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures

Pelvic and acetabular fractures are commonly due to high-energy injuries. Previous studies have shown that pelvic and acetabular fractures are associated with a broad spectrum of incidence of DVT (range: 2%-60%) and PE (range: 0.99%-21.74%; Table 4).5,6,8,10,11,13,2226 In a study with 318 554 trauma patients, the incidence of PE in patients with pelvic fractures was 2 times higher than that in the overall trauma patients (0.6% vs 0.3%).27 In our study, the incidence of perioperative DVT in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures was higher than the expected incidence. Despite physical and chemical prophylaxis, the overall incidence of DVT was 29.09%. The incidence of proximal DVT was 19.09%, which was far higher than the incidence of DVT in patients with other fractures. Three (2.73%) patients sustained symptomatic PE that was confirmed by CT pulmonary angiography in our study. This rate is lower than that in previous studies reporting the incidence based on routine screening. Sen et al reported 17.85% (10/56), and Kim et al reported 9.47% (9/95).11,12

Table 4.

Comparison of the Current Study With Previous Reports.

Fishmann et al13 Montgomery et al15 Stannard et al5 Steele et al23 Moed et al8 Niikura et al6 Kim et al11 Current Study
n 197 101 222 103 229 46 95 110
Mean age 40 42 37 37 53.4 57 44.2 ± 13.80
Associated injury 120 66 77 95 (in control group) 48
Radiological screening Color duplex MRV MRV ultrasound Color duplex Ultrasound Contrast-enhanced CT or ultrasonography CT venography Color duplex
DVT 11 preop, 6 postop 34 proximal 24 10 35 proximal 16 preop 19 Postop 9 (3 pts in proximal and 6 pts in distal) 29 (16 pts in proximal 13 pts in distal 32 (21 pts in proximal and 11 pts in distal )
PE 2 (nonfatal), 1 (fatal) 1 (nonfatal) 3 (nonfatal) 5 (4 nonfatal, 1 fatal PE) 2 (nonfatal) 10 (nonfatal) 9 (nonfatal) 3 (nonfatal)
The overall
 DVT 2% 33.67% 10.81% 9.71% 15.28% 19.57% 30.53% 29.09%
 PE 1% 0.99% 1.35% 4.85% 0.87% 21.74% 9.47% 2.73%
Prophylaxis Mechanical + Warfarin Heparin + IVF Mechanical + LMWH LMWH + GCS Chemoprophylaxis + SCD GCS + IPCD GCS IPCD + LMWH

Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; DVT, deep vein thrombosis; GCS, graduated compression stockings; n, number of patients; IVF, inferior vena cava filter; IPCD, intermittent pneumatic compression device; LMWH, low molecular weight heparin; MRV, magnetic resonance venography; PE, pulmonary embolism; preop, preoperative; postop, pos operative; SCD, sequential compression device.

Deep Vein Thrombosis in Pelvic Versus Acetabular Fractures

In the current study, there was a significant difference in the rate of DVT in the pelvic fracture group and the acetabular fracture group (18.75% vs 37.10%). Only a few previous studies distinguished DVT in pelvic fractures or acetabular fractures.6,11,26 Similar to the current study, Sen et al reported that the rate of DVT in acetabular fractures was higher than that in pelvic fractures (23.21% vs 5.36%).12 In contrast, Kim et al did not find any difference between pelvic and acetabular fractures (32.7% vs 35%, respectively). Consistent with the current study, Kim et al found the highest rate of DVT in VS injuries in the pelvic fracture group.

In the current study, the incidence of DVT was higher in patients with complex acetabular fractures than in those with simple acetabular fractures. This result can be explained by the severity of injury, which is associated with the injury to or stasis of adjacent intrapelvic vessels due to displacement of bony fragments or increased bleeding. In addition to injury, the surgical approach may be associated with DVT. Anterior or anterior combined with posterior approaches are usually used in complex acetabular fractures. Endothelial injury to the femoral vein and/or external iliac vein and stasis during intraoperative retraction and/or positioning through the ilio-inguinal approach and/or Stoppa approach, as well as increased bleeding and transfusion, may have contributed to a high incidence of proximal thrombosis.

Risk Factors of DVT in Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures

Age is an independent risk factor for thrombosis in adult trauma patients.28 It is even reported that patients over the age of 30 have a higher risk of developing DVT.22 However, no relationship between DVT and patient age was found in some studies.12,29 Despite the controversy, older age is often considered one of the factors associated with the development of DVT.8 In the current study, the rate of DVT in patients over the age of 60 years was 71.4%, which was much higher than the rate in those under 60 years old (22.9%; P = .014). Consistently, Kim et al reported a significantly increased rate of DVT in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures over 50 years old. Therefore, elderly patients with pelvic acetabular fractures should be evaluated more closely and at a high level of suspicion for DVT.

While gender, ISS, BMI, and comorbidities are reported to increase the risk of DVT,30,31 the current study showed no association between the incidence of DVT and these factors. Similar to previous reports, this result may be due to the higher incidence of DVT in patients with pelvic acetabular fractures.32

Trauma, bleeding, anesthesia, increased hypercoagulability, and subsequent manipulation during surgery further injures the vascular endothelium,7 resulting in increased risk of DVT. Based on the exposure, the degree of soft tissue, vascular endothelial injury, coagulated substances released into vessels are expected to be different in the ORIF than in the CRIF group. Consequently, a higher incidence of DVT is expected in the ORIF group. However, in our study, there was no significant difference between these 2 groups (χ2 = 0.003, P = 1.001), which may be related to the selection basis.

Ultrasonography is the most commonly used method for the diagnosis of DVT; on the other hand, it cannot predict the occurrence of DVT in patients with fractures. Many studies have focused on predicting the occurrence of DVT using early detection methods, especially blood d-dimer levels. Increased d-dimer levels have been associated with the degree of trauma, the degree of inflammatory reactions, pregnancy, aging, and other factors.33 The findings of the current study suggest that d-dimer testing in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures has limited significance because the d-dimer test was positive in all patients.

The role of the time from injury to surgery in the development of DVT is controversial. Steele et al23 reported that there was no correlation between DVT incidence and the time from injury to surgery. This finding is in contrast to the studies by Stannard et al,34 Arroyo et al,10 and Dennis et al.35 Symptomatic VTE and lethal PE occur most commonly 2 to 5 weeks after injury.34,36 Therefore, 2 weeks from injury to surgery was used as the time point threshold for comparison in the current study. We found that the incidence of DVT was significantly higher if the time to surgery was longer than 2 weeks. While the patient may not always be medically ready before 2 weeks, the goal should be to perform the surgery as soon as the patient is medically stable.

The present study found that the incidence of DVT in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures combined with other injuries was significantly higher than that in patients without other injuries. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the associated injury was an independent risk factor for DVT in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures. One of the reasons for the high incidence of DVT in these patients is the failure of effective anticoagulation therapy in the early posttraumatic period because of the risk of bleeding.37 For high-risk cases, regular DUS screening should be performed preoperatively and postoperatively. If patients are diagnosed with DVT, low molecular weight heparin at a therapeutic dose (4100 U, twice a day) should be prescribed, and mechanical thromboprophylaxis should be stopped immediately. Patients who are diagnosed with proximal DVT (popliteal vein or more proximal) should undergo preoperative placement of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter.

The current study has limitations. The reason for the higher incidence of proximal DVT in this study may be related to the surgical approach. However, the smaller sample size groups are not compared according to the surgical approach. In addition, the diagnostic value of DUS for DVT is still controversial, but it is still the most widely used method in clinical practice. Venography was not used, which might also lead to underdiagnosis. Another limitation was that the intrapelvic veins were not evaluated.

Conclusion

In summary, even with mechanical and chemical thromboprophylaxis, the rate of DVT in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures is still very high, and most of the thromboses are located proximal to the popliteal vein. The rate of DVT is higher in acetabular fractures compared to pelvic fractures. Age older than 60 years, associated injuries, and the time from injury to operation of more than 2 weeks were independent risk factors.

Authors’ Note

Ping Liu and Kun Zhang contributed equally to this work.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by the Social Development Foundation of Shaanxi Province (Grant #: 2017ZDXM-SF-009).

ORCID iD: Kun Zhang, MD Inline graphic https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8075-5873

References

  • 1. Briffa N, Pearce R, Hill AM, Bircher M. Outcomes of acetabular fracture fixation with ten years’ follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(2):229–236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Halawi MJ. Pelvic ring injuries: surgical management and long-term outcomes. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2016;7(1):1–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Eckardt H, Egger A, Hasler RM, et al. Good functional outcome in patients suffering fragility fractures of the pelvis treated with percutaneous screw stabilisation: assessment of complications and factors influencing failure. Injury. 2017;48(12):2717–2723. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Van Loon P, Kuhn S, Hofmann A, Hessmann MH, Rommens PM. Radiological analysis, operative management and functional outcome of open book pelvic lesions: a 13-year cohort study. Injury. 2011;42(10):1012–1019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Stannard JP, Singhania AK, Lopez-Ben RR, et al. Deep-vein thrombosis in high-energy skeletal trauma despite thromboprophylaxis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(7):965–968. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Niikura T, Lee SY, Oe K, et al. Incidence of venous thromboembolism in pelvic and acetabular fractures in the Japanese population. J Orthop Sci. 2012;17(3):233–238. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Geerts WH, Code KI, Jay RM, Chen E, Szalai JP. A prospective study of venous thromboembolism after major trauma. New Engl J Med. 1994;331(24):1601–1606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Moed BR, Miller JR, Tabaie SA. Sequential duplex ultrasound screening for proximal deep venous thrombosis in asymptomatic patients with acetabular and pelvic fractures treated operatively. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;72(2):443–447. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Sharma OP, Oswanski MF, Joseph RJ, et al. Venous thromboembolism in trauma patients. Am Surg. 2007;73(11):1173–1180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Arroyo W, Nelson KJ, Belmont PJ, Jr, Bader JO, Schoenfeld AJ. Pelvic trauma: what are the predictors of mortality and cardiac, venous thrombo-embolic and infectious complications following injury? Injury. 2013;44(12):1745–1749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Kim JW, Oh CW, Oh JK, et al. The incidence and the risk factors of venous thromboembolism in Korean patients with pelvic or acetabular fractures. J Orthop Sci. 2014;19(3):471–477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Sen RK, Kumar A, Tripathy SK, Aggarwal S, Khandelwal N, Manoharan SR. Risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism in Indian patients sustaining pelvi-acetabular injury. Int Orthop. 2011;35(7):1057–1063. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Fishmann AJ, Greeno RA, Brooks LR, Matta JM. Prevention of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in acetabular and pelvic fracture surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(305):133–137. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Hill J, Treasure T, National Clinical Guideline Centre for Acute and Chronic Conditions. Reducing the risk of venous thromboembolism in patients admitted to hospital: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 2010;340:c95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Montgomery KD, Geerts WH, Potter HG, Helfet DL. Practical management of venous thromboembolism following pelvic fractures. Orthop Clin North Am. 1997;28(3):397–404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Paffrath T, Wafaisade A, Lefering R, et al. Venous thromboembolism after severe trauma: incidence, risk factors and outcome. Injury. 2010;41(1):97–101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Battistella FD, Torabian SZ, Siadatan KM. Hospital readmission after trauma: an analysis of outpatient complications. J Trauma. 1997;42(6):1012–1016; discussion 1016-1017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Brasel KJ, Borgstrom DC, Weigelt JA. Cost-effective prevention of pulmonary embolus in high-risk trauma patients. J Trauma. 1997;42(3):456–460; discussion 460-452. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Young JW, Burgess AR, Brumback RJ, Poka A. Pelvic fractures: value of plain radiography in early assessment and management. Radiology. 1986;160(2):445–451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Judet R, Judet J, Letournel E. Fractures of the acetabulum: classification and surgical approaches for open reduction. Preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1964;46:1615–1646. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. He W. Ultrasonic examination of deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities. Natl Med J China. 2003;83(7):2. [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Montgomery KD, Potter HG, Helfet DL. The detection and management of proximal deep venous thrombosis in patients with acute acetabular fractures: a follow-up report. J Orthop Trauma. 1997;11(5):330–336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Steele N, Dodenhoff RM, Ward AJ, Morse MH. Thromboprophylaxis in pelvic and acetabular trauma surgery. The role of early treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(2):209–212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Azarbal A, Rowell S, Lewis J, et al. Duplex ultrasound screening detects high rates of deep vein thromboses in critically ill trauma patients. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54(3):743–747; discussion 747-748. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Montgomery KD, Geerts WH, Potter HG, Helfet DL. Thromboembolic complications in patients with pelvic trauma. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;(329):68–87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Sen RK, Kumar A, Tripathy S, Aggarwal S, Khandelwal N. Risk factors of venous thromboembolism in Indian patients with pelvic-acetabular trauma. J Orthop Surg. 2011;19(1):18–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Tuttle-Newhall JE, Rutledge R, Hultman CS, Fakhry SM. Statewide, population-based, time-series analysis of the frequency and outcome of pulmonary embolus in 318,554 trauma patients. J Trauma. 1997;42(1):90–99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Knudson MM, Gomez D, Haas B, Cohen MJ, Nathens AB. Three thousand seven hundred thirty-eight posttraumatic pulmonary emboli: a new look at an old disease. Ann Surg. 2011;254(4):625–632. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Dhillon KS, Askander A, Doraismay S. Postoperative deep-vein thrombosis in Asian patients is not a rarity: a prospective study of 88 patients with no prophylaxis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78(3):427–430. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Silverstein MD, Heit JA, Mohr DN, Petterson TM, O’Fallon WM, Melton LJ. III. Trends in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a 25-year population-based study. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158(6):585–593. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Dong Y, Zhang T, Zhong S, Ren Y, Zheng Z. Analysis on risk factors for deep vein thrombosis in patients with traumatic fractures [in Chinese] Chin J Orthop. 2015;35(11):1077–1083. [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Dennis JW, Menawat S, Von Thron J, et al. Efficacy of deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in trauma patients and identification of high-risk groups. J Trauma. 1993;35(1):132–138; discussion 138-139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Knowlson L, Bacchu S, Paneesha S, McManus A, Randall K, Rose P. Elevated D-dimers are also a marker of underlying malignancy and increased mortality in the absence of venous thromboembolism. J Clin Pathol. 2010;63(9):818–822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Stannard JP, Lopez-Ben RR, Volgas DA, et al. Prophylaxis against deep-vein thrombosis following trauma: a prospective, randomized comparison of mechanical and pharmacologic prophylaxis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(2):261–266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Dennis M, Mordi N, Graham C, Sandercock P, CLOTS Trails Collaboration. The timing, extent, progression and regression of deep vein thrombosis in immobile stroke patients: observational data from the CLOTS multicenter randomized trials. J Thromb Haemost. 2011;9(11):2193–2200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Ho KM, Burrell M, Rao S, Baker R. Incidence and risk factors for fatal pulmonary embolism after major trauma: a nested cohort study. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105(5):596–602. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Falck-Ytter Y, Francis CW, Johanson NA, et al. Prevention of VTE in orthopedic surgery patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 suppl):e278S–325S. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES