This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Cohn, S. M. Articles by Hammers,, L. W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Cohn, S. M. Articles by Hammers,, L. W. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Prospective Trial of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Versus Unfractionated Heparin in Moderately Injured Patients

Department of Surgery, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, Florida

Beth A. Moller, MSN

Departments of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut

Ara J. Feinstein, BA

Department of Surgery, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, Florida

Gerard A. Burns, MD

Departments of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut

Enrique Ginzburg, MD

Department of Surgery, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, Florida

Lynn W. Hammers,, DO

Departments of Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut

The safety and efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was compared with those of conventional unfractionated heparin (UH) in preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in trauma patients with moderate injuries in a prospective double-blind, randomized trial at a level I trauma center. After informed consent, trauma patients meeting inclusion criteria (age > 45 or requiring > 2 days' bedrest) received LMWH or UH twice daily in a double-blind, randomized trial. Patients were excluded if they had severe brain injuries or bleeding injuries not accessible to hemostatic control (eg, severe visceral contusions). Clinical examination and weekly venous duplex ultrasound evaluations were performed to identify DVT. One hundred four patients were randomized, 53 to receive UH and 51 to receive LMWH; 32 UH and 34 LMWH patients completed the study (mean injury severity score [ISS] = 12). There were no significant differences between groups with regard to age, sex, ISS, mechanism of injury, or doses of drug given. Outcome measures such as length of stay in the surgical intensive care unit and hospital days were similar. There were two patients with DVT in the UH group, none in the LMWH group (p = 0.493 by Fisher's exact test). This was not a statistically significant difference. There were five major bleeding complications in each group. The incidence of DVT in injured patients receiving prophylaxis appears to be quite low if individuals such as those with severe head injury or visceral contusions are excluded. LMWH is not clearly beneficial when compared with UH in this moderate-risk trauma population.

Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Vol. 33, No. 2, 219-223 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/153857449903300219


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?