Literature DB >> 10364775

Outpatient management of venous thromboembolism.

G J Vanscoy1.   

Abstract

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) have provided the necessary pharmacologic tool to facilitate the outpatient management of selected patients presenting with acute venous thromboembolism. A growing collection of clinical trial results supports the safety and efficacy of this cost-efficient management strategy. However, this approach requires careful patient selection and meticulous care planning. Several randomized multicenter trials have compared a primarily outpatient approach to treating uncomplicated proximal venous thrombosis with a LMWH administered subcutaneously once or twice daily to the inpatient use of unfractionated heparin (UFH). The results have been very encouraging and suggest that the use of subcutaneous LMWH in highly selected, uncomplicated venous thrombosis patients is as safe and effective as intravenous UFH, and that most patients can be treated as outpatient or be discharged early. Irrespective of parenteral anticoagulant approach, warfarin therapy was commenced on day 1 and continued for 3 months. A recent publication by Dedden and colleagues describes a 1-year experience with a pharmacy-managed program for the home treatment of patients presenting with proximal deep vein thrombosis. A plan for coordinated patient care was implemented which included a process for patient referrals, standardized protocol orders, a plan for holding area processing and home healthcare agency follow-up, and subsequent oral anticoagulation management. Results of the program demonstrate a significant healthcare savings (as compared with standard inpatient management) with no significant compromise in patient outcomes. Recently published trials by the Columbus Investigators and Simonneau and colleagues have looked beyond uncomplicated proximal venous thromboembolism to include patients presenting with recurrent venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Results suggest the subcutaneous use of LMWH is as safe and effective as intravenous UFH. Such data begin to lay the scientific foundation for the expanded clinical base of patients who may be candidates for an outpatient management approach. In today's cost-conscience environment, managing the treatment of select venous thromboembolism patients with LMWH(s) and warfarin therapy in an outpatient environment represents an evolving approach that is economically logical, does not compromise patient outcomes, but requires considerable planning to address a myriad of logistical issues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10364775     DOI: 10.1023/a:1008821217432

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis        ISSN: 0929-5305            Impact factor:   2.300


  18 in total

Review 1.  Low-molecular-weight heparins.

Authors:  J I Weitz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1997-09-04       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Pharmacy-managed program for home treatment of deep vein thrombosis with enoxaparin.

Authors:  P Dedden; B Chang; D Nagel
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  1997-09-01       Impact factor: 2.637

Review 3.  Current status of pulmonary thromboembolic disease: pathophysiology, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment.

Authors:  W R Bell; T L Simon
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1982-02       Impact factor: 4.749

4.  Fatal pulmonary emboli in hospitalized patients. An autopsy study.

Authors:  I Rubinstein; D Murray; V Hoffstein
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1988-06

5.  The weight-based heparin dosing nomogram compared with a "standard care" nomogram. A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  R A Raschke; B M Reilly; J R Guidry; J R Fontana; S Srinivas
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1993-11-01       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Comparison of efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparins and unfractionated heparin in initial treatment of deep venous thrombosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  A Leizorovicz; G Simonneau; H Decousus; J P Boissel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-07-30

7.  Low-molecular-weight heparins and unfractionated heparin in the treatment of patients with acute venous thromboembolism: results of a meta-analysis.

Authors:  S Siragusa; B Cosmi; F Piovella; J Hirsh; J S Ginsberg
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.965

8.  A comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin administered primarily at home with unfractionated heparin administered in the hospital for proximal deep-vein thrombosis.

Authors:  M Levine; M Gent; J Hirsh; J Leclerc; D Anderson; J Weitz; J Ginsberg; A G Turpie; C Demers; M Kovacs
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-03-14       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Treatment of venous thrombosis with intravenous unfractionated heparin administered in the hospital as compared with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin administered at home. The Tasman Study Group.

Authors:  M M Koopman; P Prandoni; F Piovella; P A Ockelford; D P Brandjes; J van der Meer; A S Gallus; G Simonneau; C H Chesterman; M H Prins
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-03-14       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Incidence of acute deep vein thrombosis in two districts. A phlebographic study.

Authors:  A Kierkegaard
Journal:  Acta Chir Scand       Date:  1980
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.