Electrostimulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with major trauma: A prospective randomized study

George C. Velmahos, Patrizio Petrone, Linda S. Chan, Sue Ellen Hanks, Carlos V. Brown, Demetrios Demetriades

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Current methods of posttraumatic thromboprophylaxis (heparins and sequential compression devices) are inadequate. New methods should be tested. Muscle electrostimulation (MEST) has been used over the years with mixed - but predominantly encouraging - results for a variety of conditions, including prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). It has not been tested in multiple trauma patients. Methods. Trauma patients with Injury Severity Score higher than 9 who were admitted to the intensive care unit and had a contraindication for prophylactic heparinization were randomized to groups MEST and control. MEST patients received 30-minute MEST sessions twice daily for 7 to 14 days. Venous flow velocity and venous diameter were measured by duplex venous scan. Venography - or, if not available, duplex - was used to evaluate the presence of proximal and peripheral DVT between days 7 and 15. Results. After exclusions, 26 MEST and 21 control patients completed the study and received outcome evaluation by venography (25) or duplex (22). Three patients in each group developed proximal DVT (11.5% vs 14%, P =. 79), and an additional 4 (15%) MEST group and 3 (14%) control group patients developed peripheral DVT (P =. 96). There was no difference in venous flow velocity or venous diameter between the groups. Conclusions. MEST was not effective in decreasing DVT rates in major trauma patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)493-498
Number of pages6
JournalSurgery
Volume137
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2005

Fingerprint

Venous Thrombosis
Prospective Studies
Muscles
Wounds and Injuries
Phlebography
Injury Severity Score
Multiple Trauma
Intensive Care Units
Heparin
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Equipment and Supplies
Control Groups

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Velmahos, G. C., Petrone, P., Chan, L. S., Hanks, S. E., Brown, C. V., & Demetriades, D. (2005). Electrostimulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with major trauma: A prospective randomized study. Surgery, 137(5), 493-498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2005.01.010

Electrostimulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with major trauma : A prospective randomized study. / Velmahos, George C.; Petrone, Patrizio; Chan, Linda S.; Hanks, Sue Ellen; Brown, Carlos V.; Demetriades, Demetrios.

In: Surgery, Vol. 137, No. 5, 05.2005, p. 493-498.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Velmahos, GC, Petrone, P, Chan, LS, Hanks, SE, Brown, CV & Demetriades, D 2005, 'Electrostimulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with major trauma: A prospective randomized study', Surgery, vol. 137, no. 5, pp. 493-498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2005.01.010
Velmahos, George C. ; Petrone, Patrizio ; Chan, Linda S. ; Hanks, Sue Ellen ; Brown, Carlos V. ; Demetriades, Demetrios. / Electrostimulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with major trauma : A prospective randomized study. In: Surgery. 2005 ; Vol. 137, No. 5. pp. 493-498.
@article{1a9a7fc19fec4ffba849824683b8ac52,
title = "Electrostimulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with major trauma: A prospective randomized study",
abstract = "Background. Current methods of posttraumatic thromboprophylaxis (heparins and sequential compression devices) are inadequate. New methods should be tested. Muscle electrostimulation (MEST) has been used over the years with mixed - but predominantly encouraging - results for a variety of conditions, including prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). It has not been tested in multiple trauma patients. Methods. Trauma patients with Injury Severity Score higher than 9 who were admitted to the intensive care unit and had a contraindication for prophylactic heparinization were randomized to groups MEST and control. MEST patients received 30-minute MEST sessions twice daily for 7 to 14 days. Venous flow velocity and venous diameter were measured by duplex venous scan. Venography - or, if not available, duplex - was used to evaluate the presence of proximal and peripheral DVT between days 7 and 15. Results. After exclusions, 26 MEST and 21 control patients completed the study and received outcome evaluation by venography (25) or duplex (22). Three patients in each group developed proximal DVT (11.5{\%} vs 14{\%}, P =. 79), and an additional 4 (15{\%}) MEST group and 3 (14{\%}) control group patients developed peripheral DVT (P =. 96). There was no difference in venous flow velocity or venous diameter between the groups. Conclusions. MEST was not effective in decreasing DVT rates in major trauma patients.",
author = "Velmahos, {George C.} and Patrizio Petrone and Chan, {Linda S.} and Hanks, {Sue Ellen} and Brown, {Carlos V.} and Demetrios Demetriades",
year = "2005",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.surg.2005.01.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "137",
pages = "493--498",
journal = "Surgery (United States)",
issn = "0039-6060",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Electrostimulation for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with major trauma

T2 - A prospective randomized study

AU - Velmahos, George C.

AU - Petrone, Patrizio

AU - Chan, Linda S.

AU - Hanks, Sue Ellen

AU - Brown, Carlos V.

AU - Demetriades, Demetrios

PY - 2005/5

Y1 - 2005/5

N2 - Background. Current methods of posttraumatic thromboprophylaxis (heparins and sequential compression devices) are inadequate. New methods should be tested. Muscle electrostimulation (MEST) has been used over the years with mixed - but predominantly encouraging - results for a variety of conditions, including prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). It has not been tested in multiple trauma patients. Methods. Trauma patients with Injury Severity Score higher than 9 who were admitted to the intensive care unit and had a contraindication for prophylactic heparinization were randomized to groups MEST and control. MEST patients received 30-minute MEST sessions twice daily for 7 to 14 days. Venous flow velocity and venous diameter were measured by duplex venous scan. Venography - or, if not available, duplex - was used to evaluate the presence of proximal and peripheral DVT between days 7 and 15. Results. After exclusions, 26 MEST and 21 control patients completed the study and received outcome evaluation by venography (25) or duplex (22). Three patients in each group developed proximal DVT (11.5% vs 14%, P =. 79), and an additional 4 (15%) MEST group and 3 (14%) control group patients developed peripheral DVT (P =. 96). There was no difference in venous flow velocity or venous diameter between the groups. Conclusions. MEST was not effective in decreasing DVT rates in major trauma patients.

AB - Background. Current methods of posttraumatic thromboprophylaxis (heparins and sequential compression devices) are inadequate. New methods should be tested. Muscle electrostimulation (MEST) has been used over the years with mixed - but predominantly encouraging - results for a variety of conditions, including prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). It has not been tested in multiple trauma patients. Methods. Trauma patients with Injury Severity Score higher than 9 who were admitted to the intensive care unit and had a contraindication for prophylactic heparinization were randomized to groups MEST and control. MEST patients received 30-minute MEST sessions twice daily for 7 to 14 days. Venous flow velocity and venous diameter were measured by duplex venous scan. Venography - or, if not available, duplex - was used to evaluate the presence of proximal and peripheral DVT between days 7 and 15. Results. After exclusions, 26 MEST and 21 control patients completed the study and received outcome evaluation by venography (25) or duplex (22). Three patients in each group developed proximal DVT (11.5% vs 14%, P =. 79), and an additional 4 (15%) MEST group and 3 (14%) control group patients developed peripheral DVT (P =. 96). There was no difference in venous flow velocity or venous diameter between the groups. Conclusions. MEST was not effective in decreasing DVT rates in major trauma patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=18144416154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=18144416154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.surg.2005.01.010

DO - 10.1016/j.surg.2005.01.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 15855919

AN - SCOPUS:18144416154

VL - 137

SP - 493

EP - 498

JO - Surgery (United States)

JF - Surgery (United States)

SN - 0039-6060

IS - 5

ER -