Literature DB >> 17448820

The efficacy and safety of enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after acute ischaemic stroke (PREVAIL Study): an open-label randomised comparison.

David G Sherman1, Gregory W Albers2, Christopher Bladin3, Cesare Fieschi4, Alberto A Gabbai5, Carlos S Kase6, William O'Riordan7, Graham F Pineo8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin or unfractionated heparin is recommended in acute ischaemic stroke, but which regimen provides optimum treatment is uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of enoxaparin with that of unfractionated heparin for patients with stroke.
METHODS: 1762 patients with acute ischaemic stroke who were unable to walk unassisted were randomly assigned within 48 h of symptoms to receive either enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneously once daily or unfractionated heparin 5000 U subcutaneously every 12 h for 10 days (range 6-14). Patients were stratified by National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (severe stroke > or =14, less severe stroke <14). The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of symptomatic or asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, or fatal pulmonary embolism. Primary safety endpoints were symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, major extracranial haemorrhage, and all-cause mortality. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00077805.
FINDINGS: In the efficacy population (ie, one or more dose received, presence of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, or assessment for venous thromboembolism), enoxaparin (n=666) and unfractionated heparin (669) were given for 10.5 days (SD 3.2). Enoxaparin reduced the risk of venous thromboembolism by 43% compared with unfractionated heparin (68 [10%] vs 121 [18%]; relative risk 0.57, 95% CI 0.44-0.76, p=0.0001; difference -7.9%, -11.6 to -4.2); this reduction was consistent for patients with an NIHSS score of 14 or more (26 [16%] vs 52 [30%]; p=0.0036) or less than 14 (42 [8%] vs 69 [14%]; p=0.0044). The occurrence of any bleeding was similar with enoxaparin (69 [8%]) or unfractionated heparin (71 [8%]; p=0.83). The frequency of the composite of symptomatic intracranial and major extracranial haemorrhage was small and closely similar between groups (enoxaparin 11 [1%] vs unfractionated heparin 6 [1%]; p=0.23). We noted no difference for symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage between groups (4 [1%] vs 6 [1%], respectively; p=0.55); the rate of major extracranial bleeding was higher with enoxaparin than with unfractionated heparin (7 [1%] vs 0; p=0.015).
INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that for patients with acute ischaemic stroke, enoxaparin is preferable to unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in view of its better clinical benefits to risk ratio and convenience of once daily administration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17448820     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60633-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  46 in total

Review 1.  Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin in the hospitalized medical patient: the case for thrice daily over twice daily dosing.

Authors:  Charles E Mahan; Mario Pini; Alex C Spyropoulos
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 3.397

2.  [European Stroke Organisation 2008 guidelines for managing acute cerebral infarction or transient ischemic attack. Part 1].

Authors:  P Ringleb; P D Schellinger; W Hacke
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 3.  Ischemic stroke: prevention of complications and secondary prevention.

Authors:  Marilyn M Rymer; Debbie Summers
Journal:  Mo Med       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec

4.  Risk assessment of deep-vein thrombosis after acute stroke: a prospective study using clinical factors.

Authors:  Li-Ping Liu; Hua-Guang Zheng; David Z Wang; Yi-Long Wang; Mohammed Hussain; Hai-Xin Sun; An-Xin Wang; Xing-Quan Zhao; Ke-Hui Dong; Chun-Xue Wang; Wen He; Bin Ning; Yong-Jun Wang
Journal:  CNS Neurosci Ther       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 5.243

5.  Early Acute Ischemic Stroke Management for Pharmacists.

Authors:  Michael Armahizer; Alison Blackman; Michael Plazak; Gretchen M Brophy
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2018-08-07

6.  American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prophylaxis for hospitalized and nonhospitalized medical patients.

Authors:  Holger J Schünemann; Mary Cushman; Allison E Burnett; Susan R Kahn; Jan Beyer-Westendorf; Frederick A Spencer; Suely M Rezende; Neil A Zakai; Kenneth A Bauer; Francesco Dentali; Jill Lansing; Sara Balduzzi; Andrea Darzi; Gian Paolo Morgano; Ignacio Neumann; Robby Nieuwlaat; Juan J Yepes-Nuñez; Yuan Zhang; Wojtek Wiercioch
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-11-27

Review 7.  The intensive care management of acute ischemic stroke: an overview.

Authors:  Matthew A Kirkman; Giuseppe Citerio; Martin Smith
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 17.440

8.  Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for hospitalized medical patients, current status and strategies to improve.

Authors:  Hikmat Abdel-Razeq
Journal:  Ann Thorac Med       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.219

9.  Venous thromboembolic events in hospitalised medical patients.

Authors:  Gregory Piazza; John Fanikos; Maksim Zayaruzny; Samuel Z Goldhaber
Journal:  Thromb Haemost       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 5.249

10.  Randomized clinical stroke trials in 2007.

Authors:  Meheroz H Rabadi; John P Blass
Journal:  Open Neurol J       Date:  2008-10-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.