Eur J Intern Med. 2023 Apr 5:S0953-6205(23)00104-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2023.03.032. Online ahead of print.
BACKGROUND: There are knowledge gaps regarding the comparative efficacy and safety of various venous thromboprophylaxis regimens with extended timing in patients hospitalized for acute medical illnesses. This study aims to investigate the optimal regimen for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in these patients.
METHODS: We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different venous thromboprophylaxis regimens for acutely ill medical patients. Outcomes included venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality. Risk ratios (RR) and associated 95% credible interval (CrI) were estimated. In addition, we assessed the most effective interventions in a subgroup of patients with stroke.
RESULTS: We identified five RCTs involving 40,124 patients. Extended thromboprophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) (RR 0.78, 95% CrI 0.68 to 0.89) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (RR 0.62, 95% CrI 0.45 to 0.84) were superior to standard therapy in the prevention of venous thromboembolism. However, both of them (DOAC: RR 1.99, 95% CrI 1.38 to 2.92; LMWH: RR 2.56, 95% CrI 1.26 to 5.68) lead to a significant increase in major bleeding). Moreover, both LMWH (RR 0.76, 95% CrI 0.57 to 1.00) and DOAC (RR 0.86, 95% CrI 0.76 to 0.98) with extended thromboprophylaxis showed favorable net clinical benefit compared to standard therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Extended thromboprophylaxis, especially with LMWH, showed better efficacy in venous thromboembolism reduction with increased risk of major bleeding. The beneficial effect of LMWH with extended timing has also been shown in stroke patients. Overall, extended thromboprophylaxis is associated with a positive net clinical benefit.
PMID:37029050 | DOI:10.1016/j.ejim.2023.03.032