Comparing pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis to intermittent pneumatic compression in acute intracerebral haemorrhage: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Issue 11 (5th November 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yogendrakumar, Vignan; Lun, Ronda; Hutton, Brian; Fergusson, Dean A; Dowlatshahi, Dar
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 8:Issue 11(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-11-05
• Subjects: intracerebral hemorrhage -- venous thromboembolism -- intermittent pneumatic compression -- pharmacological prophylaxis; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024405
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Patients with an intracerebral haemorrhage are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism. Pharmacotherapy and pneumatic compression devices are capable of preventing venous thromboembolism, however both interventions have limitations. There are no head-to-head comparisons between these two interventions. To address this knowledge gap, we plan to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis to examine the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological prophylaxis and mechanical compression devices in the context of intracerebral haemorrhage. Methods and analysis: MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Internet Stroke Trials Registry will be searched with assistance from an experienced information specialist. Eligible studies will include those that have enrolled adults presenting with spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage and compared one or more of the respective interventions against each other and/or a control. Primary outcomes to be assessed are occurrence of new venous thromboembolism (deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism) and haematoma expansion, defined as a significant enlargement of baseline haemorrhage or new haemorrhage occurrence. Both randomised and non-randomised comparative studies will be included. Data on participant characteristics, study design, intervention details and outcomes will be extracted. Study quality will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Robins-I tool. Bayesian network meta-analyses will be performed to compare interventions based on all available direct and indirect evidence. If the transitivity assumption for network meta-analysis cannot be met, we will perform a qualitative assessment. Ethics and dissemination: Formal ethics is not required as primary data will not be collected. The findings of this study will be disseminated through conference presentations, and peer-reviewed publications. In an area of clinical practice where equipoise exists, the findings of this study may assist in determining which treatment intervention is most effective in venous thromboembolism prevention. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018090960.