Leiden Trial in Prevention of Post-Operative ThromboEmbolic Events

NCT ID: NCT02987946

Last Updated: 2025-03-10

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

280 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2016-12-31

Study Completion Date

2024-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

In neurosurgical patients, the risk for venous thromboembolic events (VTE) is high due to the relatively long duration of surgery, the high occurrence of prolonged immobilization of patients due to paresis of the legs or intracranial pathology causing inability to mobilise2. Moreover, intracranial and intraspinal tumours and subarachnoid haemorrhage cause hypercoagulability, which increases the risk on VTE. There is a high degree of diversity in attributed risk on thrombosis in the neurosurgical patient cohort. Due to this diversity, insufficient power of performed studies and lack of careful phenotyping and description of risk factors in previous studies on deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis, as yet the optimal DVT prophylaxis in neurosurgery remains unclear. A prospective randomized study with adequate power and detailed information on patient related factors (malignancy, subarachnoid haemorrhage, prevailing coagulopathies), type of surgery, duration of surgery, and postoperative immobilisation will allow us to identify the optimal treatment strategy for high risk neurosurgical patients.

In the current study all patients that fulfil the inclusion criteria will be subjected to post-operative systematic evaluation of VTE by echo-duplex investigation.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

It is clear that thrombo-embolic prophylaxis is mandatory in neurosurgical interventions. The current prophylactic strategy using preoperatively started low molecular-weight heparine (LMWH) allows still a considerable number of thrombo-embolic complications, in particular in those patients that are subjected to prolonged neurosurgical interventions. Guidelines advise mechanical prophylaxis. However, these guidelines are based on literature with low grade of evidence. To achieve the highest grade of evidence we will randomize subsequent patients between intermittent compression stockings with preoperative LMWH prophylaxis, and LMWH as stand alone prophylaxis. The last, being the current state of practice in all neurosurgical patients in our ward, including the high thrombosis risk group. All patients will receive preoperatively started LMWH.

There is a high degree of diversity in attributed risk on thrombosis in the neurosurgical patient cohort. Due to this diversity, insufficient power of performed studies and lack of careful phenotyping and description of risk factors in previous studies on deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis, as yet the optimal DVT prophylaxis in neurosurgery remains unclear. A prospective randomized study with adequate power and detailed information on patient related factors (malignancy, subarachnoid haemorrhage, prevailing coagulopathies), type of surgery, duration of surgery, and postoperative immobilisation will allow us to identify the optimal treatment strategy for high risk neurosurgical patients.

In the current study all patients that fulfil the inclusion criteria will be subjected to post-operative systematic evaluation of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) by echo-duplex investigation.

• 2. Goal of the study The primary goal of the current study is to investigate whether the combination of perioperative intermittent pneumatic compression and LMWH has a lower incidence of postoperative thrombo-embolic complications within a week after a high risk neurosurgical intervention in comparison to patients receiving merely LMWH prophylaxis.

Secondary research questions are:

* Is there a difference in number of patients with clinical symptoms of thromboembolus in patients receiving the combination of peroperative intermittent pneumatic compression of the lower limbs and LMWH in comparison to patients receiving merely LMWH prophylaxis in high risk neurosurgical patients, scored two months after surgery;
* What is the prevalence of VTE in high risk neurosurgical patients in the Leiden University Medical Centre (LUMC) receiving LMWH prophylaxis;
* What are the risk factors for the prevalence of VTE in high risk neurosurgical patients in the LUMC;
* What is the incidence of bleeding complications in high risk neurosurgical patients in the LUMC receiving LMWH prophylaxis;
* Is there a difference in length of hospital stay in patients receiving the combination of peroperative intermittent pneumatic compression of the lower limbs and LMWH in comparison to patients receiving merely LMWH prophylaxis in high risk neurosurgical patients;
* Is there a difference in patient perceived recovery at discharge and at 2 month follow up in patients receiving the combination of perioperative intermittent pneumatic compression and LMWH in comparison to patients receiving merely LMWH prophylaxis in high risk neurosurgical patients;
* Is there a difference in Quality of life at discharge and at 2 month follow up in patients receiving the combination of perioperative intermittent pneumatic compression of the legs and LMWH in comparison to patients receiving merely LMWH prophylaxis in high-risk neurosurgical patients;
* Is it relevant to consider cost-effectiveness of the use of perioperative intermittent pneumatic compression of the legs and if so, what is the cost-effectiveness?
* 3\. Randomized controlled trial This is a randomized controlled trial on high-risk neurosurgical patients in a University hospital (see inclusion and exclusion criteria) in which consecutive patients who meet the inclusion criteria are invited to participate in the trial. Clinical and demographic data are gathered, as well as surgical details and prevailing complications. Postoperative bleeding requiring secondary surgery or lengthening of hospital stay will be documented as a clinically relevant bleeding complication. All patients receive Fraxiparine 2850 IU (international units) daily, starting preoperatively compatible with current practice. At admission patients will be randomized to be subjected to perioperative (48 hrs) intermittent pneumatic compression or standard care. Following current guidelines in the LUMC the Fraxiparine dose is doubled to 5600 IU in patients with a weight above 100 kg.

All randomized patients will receive a postoperative doppler examination of the major veins of both lower limb in order to identify a possible VTE. A post-operative thrombo-embolic complication is defined as follows7:

1. Asymptomatic VTE confirmed by echo Doppler;
2. Symptomatic VTE confirmed by echo Doppler;
3. Symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) confirmed by CT scan
4. Fatal pulmonary embolism confirmed by autopsy

\> 3.1 Population The neurosurgical patient has an increased risk on thrombo-embolic complications because he is subjected to an intervention that in general takes a long time and causes the patient to be immobilized during a longer period (during and directly after surgery). Moreover, the pathology is frequently carcinomatous, having an increased risk for thrombo-embolic events by nature. The in- and exclusion criteria are aiming at these properties of the patients. All consecutive patients that fulfil the criteria will be invited to participate in this study. In order to be included the patient has to sign an informed consent. Based on a power analysis 140 patients in both randomization arms have to be included (based on a VTE incidence of 15% which will decrease to 5% after treatment with intermittent pneumatic leg pumps during surgery; alpha 0.05, power 80%) to be able to obtain a significant effect.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Deep-Venous Thrombosis

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Fraxiparine

Intervention: All patients receive Fraxiparine 2850 IE daily, starting preoperatively compatible with current practice. After randomization the patients in this arm will be subjected to fraxipareine 2850 IE daily. According to current guidelines in the LUMC the Fraxiparine dose is doubled to 5600 IE in patients with a weight above 100 kg.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Fraxiparine

Intervention Type DRUG

All patients receive Fraxiparine 2850 IE daily, starting preoperatively compatible with current practice.

IPD

Intervention: IPD Device: After randomization the patients in this arm will be subjected to fraxiparine 2850 IE daily and intermittent pressure devices for at least 48 hours or until mobilization. The intermittent pressure device is a leg pump delivered by Converis(R).

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

IPD Device delivered by Converis

Intervention Type DEVICE

After randomization patients will be subjected to perioperative (48 hrs) intermittent pneumatic compression.

Fraxiparine

Intervention Type DRUG

All patients receive Fraxiparine 2850 IE daily, starting preoperatively compatible with current practice.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

IPD Device delivered by Converis

After randomization patients will be subjected to perioperative (48 hrs) intermittent pneumatic compression.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Fraxiparine

All patients receive Fraxiparine 2850 IE daily, starting preoperatively compatible with current practice.

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

IPD LMWH

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Tumour surgery (spinal or intracranial);
* \>180 min estimated surgical intervention time;
* \>240 min time under anaesthesia;
* Spine trauma surgery;

Exclusion Criteria

* • Age under 18 years;

* Perioperative continuation of anti coagulant therapy indicated other than prophylactic LMWH;
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Medtronic - MITG

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

Leiden University Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

C.L.A.Vleggeert-Lankamp

MD MSc PhD

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Carmen Vleggeert-Lankamp, MD MSc PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Leiden University Medical Centre

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Leiden University Medical Centre

Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Netherlands

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

NL56552.058.16

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.