Electrical calf muscle stimulation in patients with post-thrombotic syndrome and residual venous obstruction after anticoagulation therapy

Alternative physical treatments for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in surgical patients: a systematic review

“…A total of 1,136 patients were reported in the publications, with a median age of 58 years (range 18-79 years). Five studies evaluated the use of calf muscle electrostimulation therapy for reducing DVT incidence in surgical patients, with two of these involving post-operative stimulation only [17,18], one study utilising this modality intra-operatively only [19] and two studies using this modality throughout the peri-operative period [20,21]. Each of the remaining five studies looked at different interventions.…”

“…Physiological studies have demonstrated that electrostimulation of calf muscles is able to optimise venous return [30,31] and this was the most commonly studied intervention included in this review. Izumi et al [21] and Lobastov et al [18] both investigated the use of calf muscle electrostimulation devices, demonstrating statistically significant reduction in DVT rates when compared to control groups. Prevot also reported similar findings, although his study did not test the statistical significance.…”

“…Overall, the four studies that reported significant benefits also had some methodological flaws in terms of risk of bias. The RCTs conducted by Sobieraj-Teague [26] et al and Izumi et al [21] were considered to have "some concerns" in their risk of bias analysis, while the cohort studies by Lobastov et al [18] and Imai et al [25] were rated as "fair".…”

Intermittent Pneumatic Compression in Addition to Standard Prophylaxis of Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism in Extremely High-risk Patients (IPC SUPER): A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…The prevalence of asymptomatic postoperative vein thrombosis at the top of the standard prophylaxis with ECS and LMWH was assumed as 30%. 13,21 Taking into account the fact that pharmacomechanical prophylaxis should provide a further 60% VTE risk reduction, 16 the absolute difference of 18% was assumed. Using Fisher's exact test for primary statistical analysis with a power of 80% and type I error of 0.05, the sample size was estimated as 180 subjects (90 þ 90 in each group).…”

“…The prevalence of asymptomatic postoperative vein thrombosis at the top of the standard prophylaxis with ECS and LMWH was assumed as 30% 13,21 . Taking into account the fact that pharmaco-mechanical prophylaxis should provide a further 60% VTE risk reduction, 16 the absolute difference of 18% was assumed.…”