Literature DB >> 10535716

Comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin, administered primarily at home, with unfractionated heparin, administered in hospital, and subcutaneous heparin, administered at home for deep-vein thrombosis.

G Belcaro1, A N Nicolaides, M R Cesarone, G Laurora, M T De Sanctis, L Incandela, A Barsotti, M Corsi, S Vasdekis, D Christopoulos, A Lennox, M Malouf.   

Abstract

In this study, 294 patients with acute proximal DVT (deep venous thrombosis) were randomly assigned to receive intravenous standard heparin in the hospital (98 patients) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) (nadroparin 0.1 mL [equivalent to 100 AXa IU] per kg of body weight subcutaneously twice daily) administered primarily at home (outpatients) or alternatively in hospital (97 patients) or subcutaneous calcium heparin (SCHep) (99 patients, 0.5 mL bid) administered directly at home. The study design allowed outpatients taking LMWH heparin to go home immediately and hospitalized patients taking LMWH to be discharged early. Patients treated with standard heparin or LMWH received the oral anticoagulant starting on the second day, and heparin was discontinued when the therapeutic range (INR 2-3) had been reached. Anticoagulant treatment was maintained for 3 months. Patients treated with SCHep were injected twice daily for 3 months without oral anticoagulants. Patients were evaluated for inclusion and follow-up with color duplex scanning. Venography was not used. In case of suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) a ventilatory-perfusional lung scan was performed. Endpoints of the study were recurrent or extension of DVT, bleeding, the number of days spent in hospital, and costs of treatments. Of the 325 patients included, 294 completed the study. Dropouts totaled 31 (10.5%); six of the 325 included patients (1.8%) died from the related, neoplastic illness. Recurrence or extension of DVT was observed in 6.1% of patients in the LMWH group, in 6.2% in the standard heparin group, and in 7.1% in the SCHep group. Most recurrences (11/17) were in the first month in all groups. Bleedings were all minor, mostly during hospital stay. Hospital stay in patients treated with LMWH was 1.2+/-1.4 days in comparison with 5.4+/-1.2 in those treated with standard heparin. There was no hospital stay in the SCHep group. Average treatment costs in 3 months in the standard heparin group (US $2,760) were considered to be 100%; in comparison costs in the LMWH group was 28% of the standard heparin and 8% in the SCHep group. This study indicated that LMWH and SCHep can be used safely and effectively to treat patients with proximal DVT at home at a lower cost.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10535716     DOI: 10.1177/000331979905001001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angiology        ISSN: 0003-3197            Impact factor:   3.619


  10 in total

1.  Routine home treatment of deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  J Eikelboom; R Baker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-05-19

Review 2.  Home versus in-patient treatment for deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Richard Othieno; Emmanuel Okpo; Rachel Forster
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-01-09

Review 3.  Subcutaneous unfractionated heparin for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Lindsay Robertson; James Strachan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-14

Review 4.  Fixed dose subcutaneous low molecular weight heparins versus adjusted dose unfractionated heparin for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Lindsay Robertson; Lauren E Jones
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-09

5.  Once-daily enoxaparin in the outpatient setting versus unfractionated heparin in hospital for the treatment of symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Beng H Chong; Tim A Brighton; Ross I Baker; Peter Thurlow; Choon H Lee
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.300

6.  Management of venous thromboembolism: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians.

Authors:  Vincenza Snow; Amir Qaseem; Patricia Barry; E Rodney Hornbake; Jonathan E Rodnick; Timothy Tobolic; Belinda Ireland; Jodi Segal; Eric Bass; Kevin B Weiss; Lee Green; Douglas K Owens
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

7.  Hospital versus home treatment of deep vein thrombosis in a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia: Are we ready?

Authors:  Farjah Algahtani; Zohair Al Aseri; Abdurahman Aldiab; Aamer Aleem
Journal:  Saudi Pharm J       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 8.  Anticoagulation for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer.

Authors:  Maram B Hakoum; Lara A Kahale; Ibrahim G Tsolakian; Charbel F Matar; Victor Ed Yosuico; Irene Terrenato; Francesca Sperati; Maddalena Barba; Holger Schünemann; Elie A Akl
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-01-24

Review 9.  Anticoagulation for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer.

Authors:  Lara A Kahale; Charbel F Matar; Maram B Hakoum; Ibrahim G Tsolakian; Victor Ed Yosuico; Irene Terrenato; Francesca Sperati; Maddalena Barba; Holger Schünemann; Elie A Akl
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-12-08

Review 10.  Bleeding risk during treatment of acute thrombotic events with subcutaneous LMWH compared to intravenous unfractionated heparin; a systematic review.

Authors:  Giorgio Costantino; Elisa Ceriani; Anna Maria Rusconi; Gian Marco Podda; Nicola Montano; Piergiorgio Duca; Marco Cattaneo; Giovanni Casazza
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.