Prospective trial of lower molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in moderately injured patients

Stephen M. Cohn, B. A. Moller, G. A. Burns, A. J. Feinstein, Enrique Ginzburg, L. Hammers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of low molecular weight heparin (LMH) with conventional unfractionated heparin (UH) in preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in trauma patients with moderate injuries. Methods: We performed a prospective double-blind randomized trial at a level I trauma center. After informed consent, trauma patients meeting inclusion criteria (age>45 or requiring >2 days bedrest) received LMH or UH twice daily. Patients were excluded if they had severe brain injuries or bleeding injuries not accessible to hemostatic control (eg: severe visceral contusions). Clinical examination and weekly venous duplex ultrasound evaluations were performed to identify DVT. Results: 104 moderately injured trauma patients (mean ISS=12±11) were randomized, 53 patients to receive UH and 51 to receive LMH. 32 UH and 34 LMH of the enrolled patients completed the study. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to age, sex, ISS or doses of drug given. There were two DVT's in the UH group and none in the LMH group (p=.493 by Fisher exact test). Length of stay in SICU, hospital days were also not different between groups. There were 5 major bleeding complications in each group. Conclusions: The incidence of DVT in injured patients receiving prophylaxis appears to be quite low (3%) if individuals such as those with severe head injury or visceral contusions are excluded. Clinical Implications: LMH is not clearly beneficial when compared to UH for preventing venous thrombosis in moderate injured trauma patients.

Original languageEnglish
JournalChest
Volume114
Issue number4 SUPPL.
StatePublished - Oct 1 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Heparin
Low Molecular Weight Heparin
Molecular Weight
Venous Thrombosis
Wounds and Injuries
Contusions
Hemorrhage
Bed Rest
Trauma Centers
Hemostatics
Informed Consent
Craniocerebral Trauma
Brain Injuries
Length of Stay
Safety
Incidence
Pharmaceutical Preparations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Cohn, S. M., Moller, B. A., Burns, G. A., Feinstein, A. J., Ginzburg, E., & Hammers, L. (1998). Prospective trial of lower molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in moderately injured patients. Chest, 114(4 SUPPL.).

Prospective trial of lower molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in moderately injured patients. / Cohn, Stephen M.; Moller, B. A.; Burns, G. A.; Feinstein, A. J.; Ginzburg, Enrique; Hammers, L.

In: Chest, Vol. 114, No. 4 SUPPL., 01.10.1998.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cohn, SM, Moller, BA, Burns, GA, Feinstein, AJ, Ginzburg, E & Hammers, L 1998, 'Prospective trial of lower molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in moderately injured patients', Chest, vol. 114, no. 4 SUPPL..
Cohn, Stephen M. ; Moller, B. A. ; Burns, G. A. ; Feinstein, A. J. ; Ginzburg, Enrique ; Hammers, L. / Prospective trial of lower molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in moderately injured patients. In: Chest. 1998 ; Vol. 114, No. 4 SUPPL.
@article{01daa05a6fb34aeb8243c2ad36384c32,
title = "Prospective trial of lower molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in moderately injured patients",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of low molecular weight heparin (LMH) with conventional unfractionated heparin (UH) in preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in trauma patients with moderate injuries. Methods: We performed a prospective double-blind randomized trial at a level I trauma center. After informed consent, trauma patients meeting inclusion criteria (age>45 or requiring >2 days bedrest) received LMH or UH twice daily. Patients were excluded if they had severe brain injuries or bleeding injuries not accessible to hemostatic control (eg: severe visceral contusions). Clinical examination and weekly venous duplex ultrasound evaluations were performed to identify DVT. Results: 104 moderately injured trauma patients (mean ISS=12±11) were randomized, 53 patients to receive UH and 51 to receive LMH. 32 UH and 34 LMH of the enrolled patients completed the study. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to age, sex, ISS or doses of drug given. There were two DVT's in the UH group and none in the LMH group (p=.493 by Fisher exact test). Length of stay in SICU, hospital days were also not different between groups. There were 5 major bleeding complications in each group. Conclusions: The incidence of DVT in injured patients receiving prophylaxis appears to be quite low (3{\%}) if individuals such as those with severe head injury or visceral contusions are excluded. Clinical Implications: LMH is not clearly beneficial when compared to UH for preventing venous thrombosis in moderate injured trauma patients.",
author = "Cohn, {Stephen M.} and Moller, {B. A.} and Burns, {G. A.} and Feinstein, {A. J.} and Enrique Ginzburg and L. Hammers",
year = "1998",
month = "10",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "114",
journal = "Chest",
issn = "0012-3692",
publisher = "American College of Chest Physicians",
number = "4 SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prospective trial of lower molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in moderately injured patients

AU - Cohn, Stephen M.

AU - Moller, B. A.

AU - Burns, G. A.

AU - Feinstein, A. J.

AU - Ginzburg, Enrique

AU - Hammers, L.

PY - 1998/10/1

Y1 - 1998/10/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of low molecular weight heparin (LMH) with conventional unfractionated heparin (UH) in preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in trauma patients with moderate injuries. Methods: We performed a prospective double-blind randomized trial at a level I trauma center. After informed consent, trauma patients meeting inclusion criteria (age>45 or requiring >2 days bedrest) received LMH or UH twice daily. Patients were excluded if they had severe brain injuries or bleeding injuries not accessible to hemostatic control (eg: severe visceral contusions). Clinical examination and weekly venous duplex ultrasound evaluations were performed to identify DVT. Results: 104 moderately injured trauma patients (mean ISS=12±11) were randomized, 53 patients to receive UH and 51 to receive LMH. 32 UH and 34 LMH of the enrolled patients completed the study. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to age, sex, ISS or doses of drug given. There were two DVT's in the UH group and none in the LMH group (p=.493 by Fisher exact test). Length of stay in SICU, hospital days were also not different between groups. There were 5 major bleeding complications in each group. Conclusions: The incidence of DVT in injured patients receiving prophylaxis appears to be quite low (3%) if individuals such as those with severe head injury or visceral contusions are excluded. Clinical Implications: LMH is not clearly beneficial when compared to UH for preventing venous thrombosis in moderate injured trauma patients.

AB - Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of low molecular weight heparin (LMH) with conventional unfractionated heparin (UH) in preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in trauma patients with moderate injuries. Methods: We performed a prospective double-blind randomized trial at a level I trauma center. After informed consent, trauma patients meeting inclusion criteria (age>45 or requiring >2 days bedrest) received LMH or UH twice daily. Patients were excluded if they had severe brain injuries or bleeding injuries not accessible to hemostatic control (eg: severe visceral contusions). Clinical examination and weekly venous duplex ultrasound evaluations were performed to identify DVT. Results: 104 moderately injured trauma patients (mean ISS=12±11) were randomized, 53 patients to receive UH and 51 to receive LMH. 32 UH and 34 LMH of the enrolled patients completed the study. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to age, sex, ISS or doses of drug given. There were two DVT's in the UH group and none in the LMH group (p=.493 by Fisher exact test). Length of stay in SICU, hospital days were also not different between groups. There were 5 major bleeding complications in each group. Conclusions: The incidence of DVT in injured patients receiving prophylaxis appears to be quite low (3%) if individuals such as those with severe head injury or visceral contusions are excluded. Clinical Implications: LMH is not clearly beneficial when compared to UH for preventing venous thrombosis in moderate injured trauma patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33750243885&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33750243885&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:33750243885

VL - 114

JO - Chest

JF - Chest

SN - 0012-3692

IS - 4 SUPPL.

ER -