Literature DB >> 11206019

Thrombosis prophylaxis in the acutely ill medical patient: insights from the prophylaxis in MEDical patients with ENOXaparin (MEDENOX) trial.

A G Turpie1.   

Abstract

The clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of routine thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients has been well documented, but use of this approach in general medical patients remains controversial. Following is an overview of major insights from the prophylaxis in Medical patients with Enoxaparin (MEDENOX) trial, which was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of 2 dosage regimens of the low-molecular-weight heparin enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. MEDENOX was a prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, which enrolled 1,102 hospitalized patients from 68 centers in 9 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 40 mg of enoxaparin, 20 mg of enoxaparin, or placebo, given subcutaneously once a day for 6-14 days. The primary outcome was venous thromboembolism (deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) between days 1 and 14. At the 40-mg dose, the risk of venous thromboembolism was significantly reduced in patients with heart failure, as well as in patients with other medical illnesses, including respiratory failure, infectious disease, or rheumatic disorders. The incidence of venous thromboembolism was 5.5% in the group that received 40 mg of enoxaparin as compared with 14.9% in the group that received placebo (p <0.001), a benefit that was maintained at 3-month follow-up. There was no significant difference in the incidence of venous thromboembolism between the group that received 20 mg of enoxaparin (15%) and the placebo group. Adverse effects did not significantly differ between the placebo group and either enoxaparin group. This study clearly establishes an effective strategy for lowering the risk of venous thromboembolism in the acutely ill population and provides a framework for future trials in this area.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11206019     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(00)01481-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  15 in total

1.  Canadian consensus recommendations on the management of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Part 1: prophylaxis.

Authors:  J C Easaw; M A Shea-Budgell; C M J Wu; P M Czaykowski; J Kassis; B Kuehl; H J Lim; M MacNeil; D Martinusen; P A McFarlane; E Meek; O Moodley; S Shivakumar; V Tagalakis; S Welch; P Kavan
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Cost effectiveness of enoxaparin as prophylaxis against venous thromboembolic complications in acutely ill medical inpatients: modelling study from the hospital perspective in Germany.

Authors:  Peter K Schädlich; Michael Kentsch; Manfred Weber; Wolfgang Kämmerer; Josef Georg Brecht; Vijay Nadipelli; Eduard Huppertz
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  The appropriateness of enoxaparin use in Lebanese hospitals: a quality evaluation study.

Authors:  A A Zeitoun; J G Nassif; M M Zeineddine
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2011-09-10

Review 4.  A Systematic Review of the Guidelines on Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Gynecologic Oncology.

Authors:  Federico Romano; Giovanni Di Lorenzo; Guglielmo Stabile; Mariateresa Mirandola; Stefano Restaino; Patrizia Ianniello; Giuseppe Mirenda; Giuseppe Ricci
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-15       Impact factor: 6.575

5.  Incidence of venous thromboembolic events among nursing home residents.

Authors:  Josephine P Gomes; Wassim H Shaheen; Son V Truong; Edward F Brown; Brent W Beasley; Byron J Gajewski
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 6.  The challenges of managing cancer related venous thromboembolism in the palliative care setting.

Authors:  S Noble
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.401

Review 7.  Management of Venous Thromboembolisms: Part I. The Consensus for Deep Vein Thrombosis.

Authors:  Kang-Ling Wang; Pao-Hsien Chu; Cheng-Han Lee; Pei-Ying Pai; Pao-Yen Lin; Kou-Gi Shyu; Wei-Tien Chang; Kuan-Ming Chiu; Chien-Lung Huang; Chung-Yi Lee; Yen-Hung Lin; Chun-Chieh Wang; Hsueh-Wei Yen; Wei-Hsian Yin; Hung-I Yeh; Chern-En Chiang; Shing-Jong Lin; San-Jou Yeh
Journal:  Acta Cardiol Sin       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.672

8.  Hospitalized ulcerative colitis patients have an elevated risk of thromboembolic events.

Authors:  Jennifer Y Wang; Jonathan P Terdiman; Eric Vittinghoff; Tracy Minichiello; Madhulika G Varma
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-02-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 9.  Heparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients (excluding stroke and myocardial infarction).

Authors:  Raza Alikhan; Rachel Bedenis; Alexander T Cohen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-05-07

10.  Challenges in implementing government-directed VTE guidance for medical patients: a mixed methods study.

Authors:  Avril Janette Basey; Janet Krska; Tom D Kennedy; Adam John Mackridge
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-11-06       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.