ArticleJPRAS open2025
Utility of the Caprini risk assessment model in guiding venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after abdominoplasty.
Article in JPRAS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Caprini score for venous thromboembolism risk assessment: A scoping review of applications, validation, and future directions.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Abdominoplasty carries a significant risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Two main strategies have been described for prophylaxis: systematic administration of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and risk-stratified management using the Caprini score. This study aimed to assess thromboembolic risk in abdominoplasty patients and compare the cost-effectiveness of a Caprini-based strategy with routine prophylaxis. Methods: A retrospective review was performed on 219 patients who underwent abdominoplasty at a university plastic surgery unit where systematic LMWH prophylaxis was standard. Demographic data, Caprini score components, complications, and costs were analyzed, and a cost-effectiveness comparison between systematic LMWH and a Caprini-based approach was performed. Results: The mean Caprini score was 3.3 ± 1.1 (range 1-10). All patients received LMWH for a mean of 14.9 ± 1.5 days. One patient (0.45 %) developed pulmonary embolism, and 13 (5.9 %) developed hematomas. Cost analysis indicated that a risk-stratified approach could reduce LMWH expenditure by 44.5 %. Conclusions: Applying the Caprini score for VTE prophylaxis in abdominoplasty may reduce unnecessary anticoagulation and associated complications, while generating substantial cost savings for centers that do not currently use this model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.