Searching for the Best Way to Assess the Risk of Thrombosis in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery; The Role of the Caprini/Pannucci Score
- 170 Downloads
There is concern regarding the high incidence of thrombosis in plastic surgery patients. For this reason, we wanted to compare the results of the Caprini/Pannucci score in patients with and without a past history of thrombosis admitted for aesthetic plastic surgery.
This was a case–control study of 152 patients undergoing aesthetic plastic surgery procedures. We formed two groups: Group I had 70 patients who had thrombosis after aesthetic plastic surgery and group II had 82 patients without thrombosis. We studied the considered risk factors for thrombosis. We weighted the factors according to the OR and linear regressions. We then related them to the Caprini/Pannucci score.
Patients in group I had a score of 5.68 versus 3.45 in group II (p < 0.001). There was a 9.86% increase in thrombosis for each increased point in the rating. A higher effectiveness of the Caprini score was found in the high-score group; the greatest flaw was in the low-scoring group. The sensitivity was 75.71%, and the specificity was 70.73%. The factors with the greatest impact were the infiltration of fat in the buttocks, degree of obesity and time of surgery. There was an increased risk of thrombosis in patients with gluteal fat injections, varicose veins, obesity and immune disorders as well as those who had previously given birth.
To increase the effectiveness of the score and to use the score as a basis on which to decide upon prophylactic care, it is necessary to modify the score and add some factors.
Level of Evidence III
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
KeywordsThrombosis Thromboembolism risk factors Caprini/Pannucci score Aesthetic plastic surgery patients Aesthetic surgery procedures Caprini risk assessment
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The study was approved by the Committee de Seguridad de la Asociacion Mexicana de Cirugía Plástica, Estética y Reconstructiva.
Human and Animal Rights
This was a retrospective clinical study based on a review of clinical files without direct participation of the patients. Therefore, there was no risk to any patient, and the confidentiality of patients and surgeons was maintained.
For this type of study, informed consent is not required.
- 1.Cabrera-Rayo A, Nellen-Hummel H (2007) Epidemiología de la enfermedad tromboembólica venosa. Gac Méd Méx 143(1):3–5Google Scholar
- 2.Zaragoza-Delgadillo JC, Sauri-Arce JCA, Ochoa-Carrillo FJ, Fuentes-del-Toro F (2007) Prevención de la enfermedad tromboembólica venosa en cirugía. Gac Méd Méx 143(1):35–39Google Scholar
- 3.Cuenca-Pardo JA, Contreras-Bulnes L, Iribarren-Moreno R, Hernández-Valverde C (2014) Sudden death in patients of liposuction: preventive recommendations. Analytical study. Cirugía Plástica 24(1):16–30Google Scholar
- 6.Pannucci CJ, Bailey SH, Dreszer G, Wachtman CF, Zumsteg JW, Jaber RM, Hamill JB, Hume KM, Rubin JP, Neligan PC, Kalliainen LK, Hoxworth RE, Pusic AL, Wilkins EG (2011) Validation of the Caprini risk assessment model in aesthetic plastic and reconstructive surgery patients. J Am Coll Surg 212(1):105–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Pastor-Torres LF, Antigao-Ramírez R, Honorato-Pérez JM, Junquera-Planas CM, Navarro-Salas E et al (2001) Guías de práctica clínica de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología en la valoración del riesgo quirúrgico del paciente cardiópata sometido a cirugía no cardíaca. Rev Esp Cardiol 54:186–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Ibarra P, Arango J, Bayter J, Castro J, Cortes J et al (2010) Consenso de la Sociedad Colombiana de Anestesiología y Reanimación, SCARE y de la Sociedad Colombiana de Cirugía Plástica, sobre las recomendaciones para el manejo de pacientes electivos de bajo riesgo. Rev Colomb Anestesiol 37(4):390–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Ramos-Gallardo G, Orozco-Rentería D, Medina-Zamora P, Mota-Fonseca E, García-Benavides L, Cuenca-Pardo J, Contreras-Bulnes L, Ambriz-Plasencia AR, Curiel-Beltran JA (2018) Prevention of fat embolism in fat injection for gluteal augmentation, anatomic study in fresh cadavers. J Investig Surg 31(4):292–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Nendaz M, Spirk D, Kucher N et al (2014) Multicentre validation of the Geneva Risk Score for hospitalised medical patients at risk of venous thromboembolism. Explicit ASsessment of Thromboembolic RIsk and Prophylaxis for Medical PATients in SwitzErland (ESTIMATE). Thromb Haemost 111:531–538CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 33.Duran H, Cardenas-Camarena L, Bayter-Marin E, Ramos-Gallardo G, Robles-Cervantes J (2018) Microscopic and macroscopic fat embolism: solving the puzzle with case reports. PRS 142(4):569e–577eGoogle Scholar