Cutting Through the Clot: Rethinking Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Plastic Surgery with Aspirin, Direct Oral Anticoagulants, and Low Molecular Weight Heparin.

Zhou, S. Y., Foppiani, J., Vance, M. A., Yu, Z., Foster, L., Gavlasova, D., Choudry, E., Lin, G., Alnafisee, D., Suszynski, T., Choudry, U., & Lin, S. J. (2026). Cutting Through the Clot: Rethinking Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Plastic Surgery with Aspirin, Direct Oral Anticoagulants, and Low Molecular Weight Heparin.. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 50(6), 2359-2371.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a critical concern in plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) due to prolonged operative duration, perioperative immobility, and procedure-specific risks. While low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has been the prophylactic standard, use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and aspirin (ASA) has been gaining traction. This study summarizes prophylactic practices in PRS.

METHODS: A systematic search of three databases was conducted. Studies evaluating ASA, DOACs, or LMWH prophylaxis in PRS with VTE, bleeding, or 30-day reoperation rates were included. Mixed anticoagulant regimens were excluded. Data on dosage, duration, and complication rates were extracted. A random-effect meta-analysis of proportions was conducted.

RESULTS: Of 884 studies screened, 7 met inclusion criteria, totaling 3,475 patients: ASA (n=402), DOACs (n=2056), and LMWH (n=802). Common regimens included ASA 325mg daily for 5 days and DOAC 10mg daily for 10 days; LMWH dosing varied. VTE rates were low across groups: 1.15% ASA, 0.3% DOACs, and 0.44% LMWH. Hematoma rates were similar for ASA (4.6%) and LMWH (4.5%), while DOACs had a higher rate (8.7%), largely influenced by an outlier. Reoperation rate was highest for ASA (16.9%), followed by DOACs (10.5%) and LMWH (8.0%).

CONCLUSION: Despite comparable VTE rates across agents, variability in bleeding and reoperation highlights the need for procedure-specific, individualized prophylaxis. ASA and LMWH may offer more predictable safety profiles, while DOACs remain promising but warrant further investigation 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 .

Last updated on 04/01/2026
PubMed