The treatment of venous thromboembolism with low-molecular-weight heparins

Tomasz Bochenek; Rafal Nizankowski

doi:10.1160/TH11-08-0565

Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Thromb Haemost 2012; 107(04): 699-716
DOI: 10.1160/TH11-08-0565

Blood Coagulation, Fibrinolysis and Cellular Haemostasis

Schattauer GmbH

The treatment of venous thromboembolism with low-molecular-weight heparins

A meta-analysis

Tomasz Bochenek

¹Department of Drug Management, Institute of Public Health, Collegium Medicum, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland

,

Rafal Nizankowski

²Department of Angiology, 2nd Chair of Internal Medicine, Collegium Medicum, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland

› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Summary

The currently recommended method of venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment is the application of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in most patients, and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) in selected groups. The VKA dose adjustment is difficult which might well render the treatment ineffective. The study aimed to compare LMWH with VKA in treating VTE in terms of efficacy and safety. A systematic review of literature and the meta-analysis of the treatment results were performed. The main differences between LMWH and VKA in terms of their respective effectiveness in treating VTE consist in appreciably more advantageous effects of LMWH in preventing deep venous thrombosis (DVT). The key difference in terms of respective safety is the greater effectiveness of LMWH in preventing minor bleedings. The advantage of LMWH in cancer patients consists predominantly in a significantly better protection against DVT episodes, whereas the advantage of LMWH in non-cancer patients is mainly owed to better protection against minor bleedings. In none of the analysed outcomes of VTE treatment, the application of VKA proved to hold any advantage over LMWH. Although, arguably, there might well be sufficient medical grounds to propose more widespread use of LMWH, it still remains a debatable issue whether the currently used therapeutic standard should also be modified accordingly. Apart from the actual findings of the present meta-analysis, pertinent economic considerations must also be addressed.

Keywords

Venous thromboembolism - low-molecular-weight heparin/LMWH - vitamin K antagonist/VKA - systematic review - meta-analysis

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Goldhaber S. Eradication of hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism. Thromb Haemost 2010; 104: 1089-1092.
2 Cohen AT, Agnelli G, Anderson FA. et al. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Europe. The number of VTE events and associated morbidity and mortality. Thromb Haemost 2007; 98: 756-764.
3 Zawilska K, Jaeschke R, Tomkowski W. et al. Polskie wytyczne profilaktyki i lecze-nia zylnej choroby zakrzepowo-zatorowej. Pol Arch Med Wewn 2009; 119 (Suppl. 01) 1-69.
4 Snow V, Qaseem A, Barry P. et al. Management of venous thromboembolism: A clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Fam Med 2007; 05: 74-80.
5 Nizankowski R, Pruszczyk P, Torbicki A. et al. Zylna choroba zakrzepowo-zatoro-wa. Szczeklik A. Choroby wewnetrzne. Medycyna Praktyczna; 2005: 401-424.
6 Lopez-Beret P, Orgaz A, Fontcuberta J. et al. Low molecular weight heparin versus oral anticoagulants in the long-term treatment of deep venous thrombosis. J Vasc Surg 2001; 33: 77-90.
7 Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D. et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1-12.
8 Alderson P, Green S. Additional Module 2. Cochrane Collaboration open learning material for reviewers. Version1.1. The Cochrane Collaboration 2002; 6.
9 Higgins J, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ. et al. Measuring incosistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003; 327: 557-560.
10 Moher D, Eastwood S, Olkin I. et al. for the QUORUM Group. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUORUM statement.. Lancet 1999; 354: 1896-1900.
11 Beckman JA, Dunn K, Sasahara AA. et al. Enoxaparin monotherapy without oral anticoagulation to treat acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Thromb Hae-most 2003; 89: 953-958.
12 Das SK, Cohen AT, Edmondson RA. et al. Low-molecular-weight heparin versus warfarin for prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism: a randomized trial. World J Surg 1996; 20: 521-527.
13 Daskalopoulos ME, Daskalopoulou SS, Tzortzis E. et al. Long-term treatment of deep venous thrombosis with a low molecular weight heparin (tinzaparin): a prospective randomized trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2005; 29: 638-650.
14 Deitcher SR, Kessler CM, Merli G. et al. Secondary prevention of venous throm-boembolic events in patients with active cancer: enoxaparin alone versus initial enoxaparin followed by warfarin for a 180-day period. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2006; 12: 389-396.
15 Gonzalez-Fajardo JA, Arreba E, Castrodeza J. et al. Venographic comparison of subcutaneous low-molecular weight heparin with oral anticoagulant therapy in the long-term treatment of deep venous thrombosis. J Vasc Surg 1999; 30: 283-292.
16 Hull RD, Pineo GF, Braut RF. et al. Long-term low-molecular-weight heparin versus usual care in proximal-vein thrombosis patients with cancer. Am J Med 2006; 119: 1062-1072.
17 Hull RD, Pineo GF, Braut G F. et al. Self-managed long-term low-molecular-weight heparin therapy: the balance of benefits and harms. Am J Med 2007; 120: 72-82.
18 Kakkar V V, Gebska M, Kadziola Z. et al. Low-molecular-weight heparin in the acute and long-term treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Haemost 2003; 89: 674-680.
19 Kucher N, Quiroz R, McKean S. et al. Extended enoxaparin monotherapy for acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Vasc Med 2005; 10: 251-256.
20 Lee AY, Levine MN, Baker RI. et al. Low-molecular-weight heparin versus a cou-marin for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 146-153.
21 Lee AY, Rickles FR, Julian JA. et al. Randomized comparison of low molecular weight heparin and coumarin derivatives on the survival of patients with cancer and venous thromboembolism. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 2123-2129.
22 Lopaciuk S, Bielska-Falda H, Noszczyk W. et al. Low molecular weight heparin versus acenocoumarol in the secondary prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Haemost 1998; 81: 26-31.
23 Massicotte P, Julian JA, Gent M. et al. An open-label randomized controlled trial of low molecular weight heparin compared to heparin and coumadin for the treatment of venous thromboembolic events in children: the REVIVE trial. Thromb Res 2003; 109: 85-92.
24 Meyer G, Marjanovic Z, Valcke J. et al. Comparison of low-molecular-weight he-parin and warfarin for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: a randomized controlled study. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 1729-1735.
25 Pini M, Aiello S, Manotti C. et al. Low molecular weight heparin versus warfarin in the prevention of recurrences after deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Haemost 1994; 72: 191-197.
26 Veiga F, Escriba A, Maluenda MP. et al. Low molecular weight heparin (enoxapa-rin) versus oral anticoagulant therapy (acenocoumarol) in the long-term treatment of deep venous thrombosis in the elderly: a randomized trial. Thromb Hae-most 2000; 84: 559-564.
27 Hamann H. Low molecular weight heparin versus coumarin in the prevention of recurrence after deep vein thrombosis. Zentralbl Chir 1999; 124: 24-26.
28 Hamann H. Rezidivprophylaxe nach Phlebothrombose - orale Antikoagulation oder niedermolekulares Heparin subkutan?. Vasomed 1998; 10: 133-136.
29 van der Heijden JF, Hutten BA, Buller HR. et al. Vitamin K antagonists or low-molecular-weight heparin for the long term treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: Cochrane Collaboration. 2001
30 Iorio A, Guercini F, Pini M. Low-molecular-weight heparin for the long-term treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism: meta-analysis of the randomized comparisons with oral anticoagulants. J Thromb Haemost 2003; 01: 1906-1913.
31 Conti S, Guercini F, Ioro A. Low-molecular-weight heparin and cancer survival: review of the literature and pooled analysis of 1.726 patients treated for at least three months. Pathophysiol Haemost Thromb 2003; 33: 197-201.
32 Ferretti G, Bria E, Giannarelli D. et al. Is recur rent veno us thromboembolism af ter therapy reduced by low-molecular-weight heparin compared with oral anticoagulants?. Chest 2006; 130: 1808-1816.
33 Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.6 [updated September 2006]. The Cochrane Library, Issue 4. 2006. Chi-chester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 140-142.
34 Spencer F, Gore J, Reed G. et al. Venous thromboembolism and bleeding in a community setting. The Worcester Venous Thromboembolism Study. Thromb Hae-most 2009; 101: 878-885.
35 Glynn R. Methodological issues affecting estimates of bleeding risks and consequences after venous thromboembolism. Thromb Haemost 2009; 101: 797-798.
36 Merli GJ, Groce JB. Pharmacological and clinical differences between low-molecular-weight heparins. Implications for prescribing practice and therapeutic interchange. P&T 2010; 35: 95-105.
37 Dolovich LR, Ginsberg JS, Douketis JD. et al. Meta-analysis comparing low-molecular-weight heparins with unfractionated heparin in the treatment of venous thromboembolism: examining some unanswered questions regarding location of treatment, products type, and dosing frequency. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 181-188.