Search

Background: Some patients with acute VTE who may previously have been exposed to heparin products have unrecognized antibodies implicated in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Antibody prevalence and patient consequences upon exposure to heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, and fondaparinux are uncertain., Methods: In this secondary analysis, we tested patients in the Matisse VTE studies at study entry for heparin-dependent antibodies and further tested patients with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-positive results for platelet-activating antibodies. We compared the risk of HIT (> 50% fall in platelet count, heparin-dependent antibodies, no contradicting features) between patients treated with heparin (either unfractionated or low molecular weight [enoxaparin]) vs those who received fondaparinux. Comparison groups for thrombocytopenia occurrence comprised patients with ELISA-positive, platelet-activating, antibody-positive results; ELISA-positive, but platelet-activating antibody-negative results; and randomly selected antibody-negative results., Results: A total of 127 of 3,994 patients (3.2%) had ELISA-positive results at baseline, but only 14 (0.4%; 95% CI, 0.2%-0.6%) had platelet-activating antibodies. Among these 14, four treated with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin developed HIT compared with zero of 10 fondaparinux-treated patients (OR, 95; 95% CI, 8-1,123; P < .001). This frequency (four of four, 100%) significantly differed from that of both heparin-treated patients whose results were ELISA positive but platelet-activating antibody negative and from heparin-treated antibody-negative control subjects (zero of 15 and zero of 27, respectively; P < .001 for both)., Conclusions: Of patients with VTE, 0.4% had pathologic platelet-activating heparin-dependent antibodies rather than the 3.2% detected by the recommended cutoff of the commercial ELISA. Among study patients with acute VTE who had platelet-activating antibodies, treatment with fondaparinux reduced the risk of precipitating rapid-onset HIT.

In the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) fondaparinux, a pentasaccharide, is a good alternative to heparin. Whether this is also true for cancer patients is unknown. We performed two post-hoc analyses of two randomized studies to compare efficacy, safety and overall survival of fondaparinux to standard initial (low-molecular-weight) heparin (LMWH) treatment in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism. Two hundred thirty-seven cancer patients with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) were initially treated with fondaparinux or enoxaparin. Two hundred forty cancer patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) received fondaparinux or unfractionated heparin. The initial treatment was followed by vitamin K antagonists. In DVT patients, the three-month recurrence rate was 5.4% in the enoxaparin recipients compared to 12.7% in those treated with fondaparinux [absolute difference 7.3%, 95% CI 0.1, 14.5]. A recurrence was observed in 8.9% of the PE patients treated with fondaparinux compared to 17.2% in the unfractionated heparin recipients [absolute difference -8.3, 95% CI -16.7, 0.1]. In both studies no difference in bleeding and overall survival was observed. Regarding overall survival and bleeding fondaparinux is comparable to enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin in cancer patients. No significant differences in recurrent VTE were observed when comparing fondaparinux with unfractionated or LMWH. Because of study limitations these results should be considered hypothesis-generating.

Background: Compression stockings are recommended for prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing neurosurgery, but anticoagulant agents have not gained wide acceptance because of concern about intracranial bleeding. Methods: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of enoxaparin in conjunction with the use of compression stockings in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing elective neurosurgery. Enoxaparin (40 mg once daily) or placebo was given subcutaneously for not less than seven days beginning within 24 hours after surgery. The primary end point was symptomatic, objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism or deep-vein thrombosis assessed by bilateral venography, which was performed in all patients on day 8±1. Bleeding side effects were carefully assessed. Results: Among the 307 patients assigned to treatment groups, 129 of the 154 patients receiving placebo (84 percent) and 130 of the 153 patients receiving enoxaparin (85 percent) had venographic studies adequate for analysis. An additional patient in the placebo group died before venography of autopsy-confirmed pulmonary embolism. In this analysis, 42 patients given placebo (32 percent) and 22 patients given enoxaparin (17 percent) had deep-vein thrombosis (relative risk in the enoxaparin group, 0.52; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.33 to 0.82; P=0.004). The rates of proximal deep-vein thrombosis were 13 percent in patients receiving placebo and 5 percent in patients receiving enoxaparin (relative risk in the enoxaparin group, 0.41; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.17 to 0.95; P=0.04). Two patients in the placebo group died of autopsy-confirmed pulmonary embolism on days 9 and 16. Major bleeding occurred in four patients receiving placebo (intracranial bleeding in all four) and four patients (intracranial bleeding in three) receiving enoxaparin (3 percent of each group). Conclusions: Enoxaparin combined with compression stockings is more effective than compression stockings alone for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective neurosurgery and does not cause excessive bleeding. (N Engl J Med 1998;339:80-5.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An intravenous course of standard (unfractionated) heparin with the dose adjusted to prolong the activated partial-thromboplastin time to a desired length is the standard initial in-hospital treatment for patients with deep-vein thrombosis, but fixed-dose subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin appears to be as effective and safe. Because the latter treatment can be given on an outpatient basis, we compared the two treatments in symptomatic outpatients with proximal-vein thrombosis but no signs of pulmonary embolism. Methods: We randomly assigned patients to adjusted-dose intravenous standard heparin administered in the hospital (198 patients) or fixed-dose subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin administered at home, when feasible (202 patients). We compared the treatments with respect to recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, quality of life, and costs. Results: Seventeen of the 198 patients who received standard heparin (8.6 percent) and 14 of the 202 patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin (6.9 percent) had recurrent thromboembolism (difference, 1.7 percentage points; 95 percent confidence interval, -3.6 to 6.9). Major bleeding occurred in four patients assigned to standard heparin (2.0 percent) and one patient assigned to low-molecular-weight heparin (0.5 percent; difference, 1.5 percentage points; 95 percent confidence interval, -0.7 to 2.7). Quality of life improved in both groups. Physical activity and social functioning were better in the patients assigned to low-molecular-weight heparin. Among the patients in that group, 36 percent were never admitted to the hospital at all, and 40 percent were discharged early. This treatment was associated with a mean reduction in hospital days of 67 percent, ranging from 29 percent to 86 percent in the various study centers. Conclusions: In patients with proximal-vein thrombosis, treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin at home is feasible, effective, and safe. (N Engl J Med 1996;334:682-7.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]