Purpose Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common preventable cause of hospitalization-associated mortality. In the absence of optimal prophylaxis and depending on the type of surgery and patient-related factors, the risk of developing VTE increases by 10% to 50%. We aimed to assess VTE risk and thromboprophylaxis among surgical patients hospitalized at surgical wards of Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital (TASH). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Materials and Methods A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted from September 1, 2018 to February 28, 2019. Data were collected using a pretested observational checklist which is prepared based on the VTE Caprini risk assessment model. Then, the collected data were checked for completeness and finally entered and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Results Out of 155 admitted patients, almost equal numbers of males (49.68%) and females (50.32%) participated in the study with a mean age of 41.87±16.84 and an age range of 13 to 89 years. Undergoing major surgery, resting in bed for more than 3 days and having acute infections (including pneumonia) were the most frequently seen VTE risk factors. Most of the study participants (135, 87.10%) were at risk of developing VTE (>1 Caprini risk score), and 47.11% were in the highest risk category (≥5 Caprini score). The maximum and minimum total risk scores were 19 and 1, respectively with a mean score of 4.53±2.31. Among patients who were at risk of developing VTE and eligible for thromboprophylaxis, only 17.78% received thromboprophylaxis and two ineligible patients received prophylaxis. Parental unfractionated heparin twice or three times per day was the most widely used thromboprophylaxis regimen. A total of 29 (18.71%) patients had one or more contraindication(s) for thromboprophylaxis and three of them took prophylaxis despite the contraindications. Only 3 (1.93%) patients admitted to surgical wards developed VTE during hospitalization. Conclusion As per the Caprini risk assessment model, the majority of surgical patients treated at TASH were at risk of developing VTE. However, thromboprophylaxis was underutilized. The incidence of VTE was 1.93% in our study.

Introduction: Aspirin appeared as a medicine to deal with aches and inflammation, but due to its antiplatelet properties, it has evolved into a drug mainly used to avert cardiovascular disease. Regardless of its therapeutic uses, the limiting aspect for aspirin use has been its affiliation with gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, classifying from acute mucosal damage to GI problems and death. Objective: The aim of this systematic review is to address the question regarding the ECA effect on the gastric mucosa. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted in the PubMed electronic databases from April 10th to April 23rd, 2020. Eligibility has been set, and based on those criteria, initially a total of 637 results were obtained, from these 58 of them were not written in English. Then, 168 articles which were free from duplication were screened and all the included articles were RCTs published after 2000. Based on these, final number of articles included on this review was 6. Results: Data were obtained from 6 published articles which reported on 15,621 participants. The reports were from 3 different countries. Most of the studies revealed that entericcoated aspirin (ECA) treatment was not an effective mechanism against GI protection. ECA administration with omeprazole can hugely reduce the incidence of endoscopic GI damage compared to the impact of ECA used alone. Even short-term administration of a low dose of ECA was significantly associated with an apparent small bowel injury. Conclusion: ECA treatment is not an effective mechanism against GI protection, and it is highly associated with small bowel injury. So the coating does not reduce risk of GI complications.

Introduction: Venous thromboembolism is a major cause of mortality and morbidity among hospitalized patients and thromboprophylaxis is one of the key strategies to reduce such events. We aimed to assess venous thromboembolism risk using Padua prediction score, thromboprophylaxis practice, and outcomes in hospitalized medical patients at Tibebe Ghion Specialized Hospital, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 219 patients admitted to Tibebe Ghion Specialized Hospital from 1 December 2018 to 31 May 2019. Data were collected from patients’ medical records using a pre-tested data abstraction format to collect patients’ clinical information and venous thromboembolism risk using the Padua prediction score. We used Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 26 for data analysis. Descriptive statistics was used to summarize the findings, and binary logistic regression analysis was used to assess association between the variables of interest. Results: Reduced mobility, recent trauma and/or surgery, heart and/or respiratory failure, and active cancer were the frequently identified venous thromboembolism risk factors. Based on Padua prediction score, 48.4% of patients were at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism. The venous thromboembolism prophylaxis was given only for 55 (25.1%) patients and 15 of them were at low risk of developing venous thromboembolism (<4 Padua score) and were ineligible for thromboprophylaxis. Fifteen (6.84%) patients developed venous thromboembolism events during their stay at the hospital and 80% of them were from high risk group. The odds of females to develop venous thromboembolism were more than 14 times higher (adjusted odds ratio = 14.51; 95% confidence interval: 2.52–83.39, p = 0.003) than males. Reduced mobility (adjusted odds ratio = 10.00; 95% confidence interval: 1.70–58.70), <1 month trauma and/or surgery (adjusted odds ratio = 18.93; 95% confidence interval: 2.30–155.56), active cancer (adjusted odds ratio = 6.00; 95% confidence interval: 1.05–34.27), chronic kidney diseases (adjusted odds ratio = 61.790; 95% confidence interval: 2.627–1453.602), and hypertension (adjusted odds ratio = 7.270; 95% confidence interval: 1.105–47.835) were significantly associated with the risk of developing venous thromboembolism. Conclusion: Nearly half of the patients were at risk of developing venous thromboembolism. Underutilization of thromboprophylaxis and inappropriate use of prophylaxis were commonly seen in Tibebe Ghion Specialized Hospital.

Low-dose aspirin or clopidogrel, statins, renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, and beta blockers are the cornerstone therapy for cardiovascular prevention in patients with coronary heart disease. Using only single-antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) has a significant risk of recurrent thrombotic complications. Objective: This systematic review aimed to compare aspirin alone and its combination with rivaroxaban for secondary cardiovascular prevention in patients with SCAD and/or PAD. Methods: The literature search was conducted on PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for articles published from November 2011 to September 2021. An advanced search strategy was used to retrieve relevant studies related to aspirin and/or rivaroxaban use for secondary cardiovascular prevention in patients with SCAD and/or PAD. Records identified from the databases were extracted using a data-abstraction format prepared in Microsoft Excel. Studies' methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022306598) and was prepared based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: A total of five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 33,959 participants were included for final analysis. These studies showed that rivaroxaban with aspirin was more effective than the standard therapy of aspirin alone in the prevention of secondary cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and/or major adverse limb events (MALEs), but the combination increased major bleeding. Conclusion:The combination of rivaroxaban with aspirin is more effective than aspirin alone in the prevention of both MACEs and MALEs in patients with stable CAD and/or PAD. However, the combination treatment is associated with increased of major bleeding. Therefore, the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin is superior to monotherapy in the management of patients with a high risk of developing MACEs and MALEs.