Back to Journals » Research and Reports in Urology » Volume 10

Use of venous-thrombotic-embolic prophylaxis in patients undergoing surgery for renal tumors: a questionnaire survey in the Nordic countries (The NORENCA -2 study)

Authors Lund L, Nisen H, Järvinen P, Fovaeus M, Gudmundsson E, Kromann-Andersen B, Ljungberg B, Nilsen F, Sundqvist P, Clark PE, Beisland C

Received 21 June 2018

Accepted for publication 17 September 2018

Published 25 October 2018 Volume 2018:10 Pages 181—187


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Jan Colli

Lars Lund,1,2 Harry Nisen,3 Petrus Järvinen,3 Magnus Fovaeus,4 Eirikur Gudmundsson,5 Bjarne Kromann-Andersen,6 Börje Ljungberg,7 Frode Nilsen,8 Pernilla Sundqvist,9 Peter E Clark,10 Christian Beisland11,12

1Department of Urology, Odense University Hospital, 2Clinical Institute, Southern University of Denmark, Odense, Denmark; 3Department of Urology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; 4Department of Urology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden; 5Department of Urology, Landspitali University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland; 6Department of Urology, Herlev University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; 7Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; 8Department of Urology, Akershus University Hospital, Lörenskog, Norway; 9Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden; 10Department of Urology, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA; 11Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, 12Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

Purpose: To examine the variation in venous thromboembolism prophylactic treatment (VTEP) among renal cancer patients undergoing surgery.
Materials and methods: An Internet-based questionnaire on renal tumor management before and after surgery was mailed to all Nordic departments of urology. The questions focused on the use of VTEP and were subdivided into different surgical modalities.
Results: Questionnaires were mailed to 91 institutions (response rate 53%). None of the centers used VTEP before surgery, unless the patient had a vena caval tumor thrombus. Overall, the VTEP utilized during hospitalization for patients undergoing renal surgery included early mobilization (45%), compression stockings (52%) and low-molecular-weight heparin (89%). In patients undergoing open radical Nx, 80% of institutions used VTEP during their hospitalization (23% compression stockings and 94% low-molecular-weight heparin). After leaving the hospital, the proportion and type of VTEP received varied considerably across institutions. The most common interval, used in 60% of the institutions, was for a period of 4 weeks. The restriction to the Nordic countries was a limitation and, therefore, may not reflect the practice patterns elsewhere. It is a survey study and, therefore, cannot measure the behaviors of those institutions that did not participate.
Conclusion: We found variation in the type and duration of VTEP use for each type of local intervention for renal cancer. These widely disparate variations in care strongly argue for the establishment of national and international guidelines regarding VTEP in renal surgery.

Keywords: venous-thrombotic-embolic prophylaxis kidney cancer, surgery, nephrectomy, mortality, complication, minimally invasive methods, thrombosis prophylaxis

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]