Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026
Augmented Reality Navigation-Guided Core Decompression for Osteonecrosis of Femoral Head
Published on: April 12, 2022
A mobile compression device for thrombosis prevention in hip and knee arthroplasty
Clifford W Colwell1, Mark I Froimson2, Scott D Anseth3
1Shiley Center for Orthopaedic Research and Education at Scripps Clinic, 11025 North Torrey Pines Road, Suite 200, La Jolla, CA 92037. E-mail address for C.W. Colwell Jr.: colwell@scripps.edu.
Background:
Venous thromboembolic events, either deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, are important complications in patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a mobile compression device (ActiveCare+S.F.T.) with or without aspirin compared with current pharmacological protocols for prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing elective primary unilateral arthroplasty of a lower-extremity joint.
Methods:
A multicenter registry was established to capture the rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolic events following primary knee arthroplasty (1551 patients) or hip arthroplasty (1509 patients) from ten sites. All patients were eighteen years of age or older with no known history of venous thromboembolism, coagulation disorder, or solid tumor. Use of the compression device began perioperatively and continued for a minimum of ten days. Patients with symptoms of deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism underwent duplex ultrasonography and/or spiral computed tomography. All patients were evaluated at three months postoperatively to document any evidence of deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism.
Results:
Of 3060 patients, twenty-eight (0.92%) had venous thromboembolism (twenty distal deep venous thrombi, three proximal deep venous thrombi, and five pulmonary emboli). One death occurred, with no autopsy performed. Symptomatic venous thromboembolic rates observed in patients who had an arthroplasty of a lower-extremity joint using the mobile compression device were noninferior (not worse than), at a margin of 1.0%, to the rates reported for pharmacological prophylaxis, including warfarin, enoxaparin, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran, except in the knee arthroplasty group, in which the mobile compression device fell short of the rate reported for rivaroxaban by 0.06%.
Conclusions:
Use of the mobile compression device with or without aspirin for patients undergoing arthroplasty of a lower-extremity joint provides a noninferior risk for the development of venous thromboembolism compared with current pharmacological protocols.
