Literature DB >> 12551829

Low-molecular-weight heparin (nadroparin) and very low doses of warfarin in the prevention of upper extremity thrombosis in cancer patients with indwelling long-term central venous catheters: a pilot randomized trial.

Patrick Mismetti1, Dominique Mille, Silvy Laporte, Véronique Charlet, Andréa Buchmüller-Cordier, Jean-Philippe Jacquin, Pierre Fournel, Claire Dutrey-Dupagne, Herv Decousus.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Upper extremity thrombosis is a major complication of central venous catheters implanted for chemotherapy in cancer patients. Vitamin K antagonists and low-molecular-weight heparins have been recommended in this setting, but their relative benefit-to-risk ratios have never been compared. DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized, open, parallel-group, multicenter trial was performed comparing the antithrombotic efficacy and safety of warfarin and the low-molecular-weight heparin, nadroparin, in cancer patients who had undergone central venous catheter implantation. Warfarin was given orally at a fixed daily dose of 1 mg and nadroparin was injected subcutaneously at a fixed daily dose of 2,850 IU for 90 days, or until venographically-confirmed thrombosis occurred. The primary efficacy outcome was the occurrence of upper extremity thrombosis confirmed by venography performed 90 days after insertion of the catheter, or earlier if symptoms of thrombosis had appeared. Safety end-points were bleeding and thrombocytopenia.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were included in the study. A total of 21 and 24 patients in the nadroparin and warfarin groups, respectively, were evaluable for primary efficacy. Six out of the 21 patients in the nadroparin group (28.6%) and 4 out of the 24 patients in the warfarin group (16.7%) had venographically-documented upper extremity thrombosis at day 90 (p=0.48). Safety was satisfactory and similar with both treatments. INTERPRETATION AND
CONCLUSIONS: Warfarin at a fixed, very low dose and nadroparin at a fixed, prophylactic dose had comparable benefit-to-risk ratios in the prevention of thrombosis associated with central venous catheters in cancer patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12551829

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Haematologica        ISSN: 0390-6078            Impact factor:   9.941


  20 in total

1.  Local thrombolytic therapy in cancer patients with central venous catheter occlusion in urgent need of antiblastic treatment: a single institution experience.

Authors:  Alberto Agazzi; Daniele Laszlo; Franco Orsi; Roberto Biffi; Giovanni Martinelli
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  Central venous catheter-related thrombosis in cancer patients: what we know and what we need to know.

Authors:  Davide Tassinari; Carlotta Santelmo; Paola Tombesi; Sergio Sartori
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-01-16       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  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

4.  Risk factors for catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) in cancer patients: a patient-level data (IPD) meta-analysis of clinical trials and prospective studies.

Authors:  W Saber; T Moua; E C Williams; M Verso; G Agnelli; S Couban; A Young; M De Cicco; R Biffi; C J van Rooden; M V Huisman; D Fagnani; C Cimminiello; M Moia; M Magagnoli; S P Povoski; S F Malak; A Y Lee
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 5.824

5.  Catheter tip position as a risk factor for thrombosis associated with the use of subcutaneous infusion ports.

Authors:  Jo Caers; Christel Fontaine; Vincent Vinh-Hung; Johan De Mey; Gerrit Ponnet; Chris Oost; Jan Lamote; Jacques De Greve; Benjamin Van Camp; Patrick Lacor
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2004-11-05       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 6.  Nadroparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in nonsurgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Walter Ageno; Jacqueline Bosch; Michel Cucherat; John W Eikelboom
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 7.  Epidemiology of cancer-related venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Ted Wun; Richard H White
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Haematol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.020

8.  Deep venous thrombosis of the neck and pulmonary embolism in patients with a central venous catheter admitted to cardiac rehabilitation after cardiac surgery: a prospective study of 815 patients.

Authors:  Rino Frizzelli; Ornella Tortelli; Vincenzo Di Comite; Redenta Ghirardi; Claudio Pinzi; Cleante Scarduelli
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2008-03-21       Impact factor: 3.397

Review 9.  Safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients.

Authors:  I García Escobar; M Antonio Rebollo; S García Adrián; A Rodríguez-Garzotto; A Muñoz Martín
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 3.405

10.  Evidence-based guidance on venous thromboembolism in patients with solid tumours.

Authors:  M A Shea-Budgell; C M J Wu; J C Easaw
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.677

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.