Subcutaneous adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin vs fixed-dose low-molecular-weight heparin in the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism. Fixed-dose, body weight-independent subcutaneous LMW heparin versus adjusted dose unfractionated intravenous heparin in the initial treatment of proximal venous thrombosis. EASTERN Investigators. Low-molecular-weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in the treatment of patients with acute pulmonary thromboembolism. 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. A randomised open-label trial comparing long-term sub-cutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin compared with oral-anticoagulant therapy in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis. Subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin compared with continuous intravenous unfractionated heparin in the treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis. Comparison of subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin with intravenous standard heparin in proximal deep-vein thrombosis. High versus low doses of unfractionated heparin for the treatment of superficial thrombophlebitis of the leg. A prospective, controlled, randomized study. Fixed-dose, body weight-independent subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin Certoparin compared with adjusted-dose intravenous unfractionated heparin in patients with proximal deep venous thrombosis.
Few reports have addressed the value of unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin in treating the full spectrum of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), including recurrent VTE and pulmonary embolism.
                In an open, multicenter clinical trial, 720 consecutive patients with acute symptomatic VTE, including 119 noncritically ill patients (16.5%) with pulmonary embolism and 102 (14.2%) with recurrent VTE, were randomly assigned to treatment with subcutaneous UFH with dose adjusted by activated partial thromboplastin time by means of a weight-based algorithm (preceded by an intravenous loading dose), or fixed-dose (adjusted only to body weight) subcutaneous nadroparin calcium. Oral anticoagulant therapy was started concomitantly and continued for at least 3 months. We recorded the incidence of major bleeding during the initial heparin treatment and that of recurrent VTE and death during 3 months of follow-up.
                Fifteen (4.2%) of the 360 patients assigned to UFH had recurrent thromboembolic events, as compared with 14 (3.9%) of the 360 patients assigned to nadroparin (absolute difference between rates, 0.3%; 95% confidence interval, -2.5% to 3.1%). Four patients assigned to UFH (1.1%) and 3 patients assigned to nadroparin (0.8%) had episodes of major bleeding (absolute difference between rates, 0.3%; 95% confidence interval, -1.2% to 1.7%). Overall mortality was 3.3% in each group.
                Subcutaneous UFH with dose adjusted by activated partial thromboplastin time by means of a weight-based algorithm is as effective and safe as fixed-dose nadroparin for the initial treatment of patients with VTE, including those with pulmonary embolism and recurrent VTE. Body weight-adjusted subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has been proven to be at least as effective and safe as dose-adjusted intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) for the treatment of patients with venous thromboembolism. However, body weight-adjusted dosage of low-molecular-weight heparin may be cumbersome and could lead possibly to incorrect dosing. Therefore a fixed LMWH dose, independent of body-weight, might rationalize initial treatment for venous thromboembolism.
                Patients with proven proximal deep-vein thrombosis were randomly assigned to fixed dose subcutaneous LMWH Certoparin (8,000 anti-factor Xa U b.i.d.; 265 patients) or to adjusted dose i.v. UFH (273 patients) for 12 days. Vitamin K antagonists were started between day 3 and 7 and continued for up to 6 months. The primary outcome measure was a 30 percent or greater improvement in the Marder Score, as revealed by repeated venography on day 12 (end of the initial treatment). The secondary composite outcome measure included death, recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding and was assessed at day 12 and after 6 months by a blinded adjunction committee.
                The Marder score improved by 30% or more in 30.3% and 25.0% of patients assigned to LMWH (198 paired venograms) and UFH (192 paired venograms), respectively (2p = 0.26). At the end of the initial treatment, the composite outcome was observed in 4 of the 265 patients (1.5%) randomized to LMWH, as compared with 14 of the 273 patients (5.1%) randomized to UFH (2p = 0.03). At 6 months these figures were 6.8% and 12.8%, respectively (risk reduction 0.53, confidence interval 0.31-0.90, 2p = 0.02).
                Fixed dose subcutaneous LMWH certoparin is at least as efficacious as UFH in resolving proximal vein thrombosis. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) appears to be as effective as unfractionated heparin (UFH) for both treatment and prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), but limited data are available for its use in acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE).
                To determine whether enoxaparin, a LMWH, was clinically as efficient and safe as UFH in patients with a diagnosis of acute PTE.
                After exclusion of those with massive forms, 59 patients with acute PTE were randomly assigned to either subcutaneous enoxaparin given twice daily (1 mg/kg/dose) or adjusted dose intravenous UFH. Oral anticoagulant treatment was begun on the second day and was given for at least 6 months. We compared the treatment regimens at day 8 and day 90 with respect to a combined end point of major bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), and death.
                In the first 8 days of treatment, 1 of 30 patients assigned to receive UFH (3.3%) reached one of the end points (recurrence), as compared with none of 29 patients assigned to enoxaparin. Statistically this difference was not significant (p = 0.508). By day 90, 3 patients assigned to UFH (10%) had symptomatic recurrent VTE, as compared with 1 patient assigned to enoxaparin (3.4%). There was neither major bleeding nor death in the study groups. There was an absolute difference of 6.4 percentage points between the two treatment groups, but the difference was statistically not significant (p = 0.318).
                Initial subcutaneous treatment with enoxaparin appeared to be as effective and safe as UFH in acute PTE.
                Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are serious complications in children and for which the standard of care, unfractionated heparin followed by oral anticoagulation (UFH/OA), is problematic. The objective of REVIVE was to compare the efficacy and safety of a low molecular weight heparin (reviparin-sodium) to UFH/OA for the treatment of VTE in children.
                This multicenter, open-label study, with blinded central outcome adjudication, randomized patients with objectively confirmed VTE to receive either reviparin-sodium or UFH/OA. Dose adjustments were made using nomograms. The efficacy outcome was based on recurrent VTE and death due to VTE during the 3-month treatment period. The safety outcomes were major bleeding, minor bleeding and death. Due to slow patient accrual, REVIVE was closed prematurely.
                At 3 months, with reviparin-sodium, 2/36 patients (5.6%) had recurrent VTE or death compared to 4/40 patients (10.0%) receiving UFH/OA (odds ratio=0.53; 95% CI=(0.05, 4.00); Fisher's exact test: 2P=0.677). There were 7 major bleeds, 2/36 (5.6%) in the reviparin-sodium group and 5/40 (12.5%) in UFH/OA group (odds ratio=0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.04, 2.76); Fisher's exact test: P=0.435). There were 5 deaths during the study period, 1 (2.8%) in the reviparin-sodium group and 4 (10.0%) in the UFH/OA group. All five deaths were unrelated to VTE but one was due to an intracranial hemorrhage in the UFH/OA group.
                Although limited by small sample size, REVIVE provides valuable information on the incidence of recurrent VTE, major bleeding and problematic issues associated with therapy of VTE in children. To evaluate whether low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) could be equally (or more) effective than oral anti-vitamin-K agents (AVK) in the long-term treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT).
                A randomised, open-label trial.
                In this trial, 241 patients with symptomatic proximal DVT of the lower limbs confirmed by duplex ultrasound scan were included. After initial LMWH, patients received 6 months of treatment with full therapeutic dosage of tinzaparin or acenocoumarol. The primary outcome was the 12-month incidence of symptomatic recurrent venous thrombo-embolism (VTE). Duplex scans were performed at 6 and 12 months.
                During the 12-month period, six patients (5%) of 119 who received LMWH and 13 (10.7%) of 122 who received AVK had recurrent VTE (p=0.11). In patients with cancer, recurrent VTE tended to be lower in the LMWH group (two of 36 [5.5%]) vs. seven of 33 [21.2%]; p=0.06). One major bleeding occurred in the LMWH group and three in the AVK group. Venous re-canalisation increased significantly at 6 months (73.1% vs. 47.5%) and at 12 months (91.5% vs. 69.2%) in the LMWH group.
                Tinzaparin was more effective than AVK in achieving re-canalisation of leg thrombi. Long-term tinzaparin was at least as efficacious and safe as AVK for preventing recurrent VTE, especially in patients with cancer. A low-molecular-weight heparin, enoxaparin sodium, has been shown to be effective and safe in preventing deep vein thrombosis both in general surgery and in high-risk orthopedic surgery. We conducted a controlled, randomized trial with enoxaparin in the treatment of established deep vein thrombosis.
                In a multicenter trial, we compared fixed-dose subcutaneous enoxaparin, given twice daily, with adjusted-dose intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) given by continuous intravenous infusion for the initial 10 days of treatment of patients with proximal vein thrombosis. The primary efficacy outcome was the change of the size of the thrombus assessed by repeated venograms between day 0 and day 10. The primary analysis of safety was based on the incidence of major bleeding during 10 days of treatment.
                There were 67 patients in each group. Venographic assessment of clot size evolution between day 0 and day 10 showed a statistically significant superiority (P < .002) of enoxaparin over the reference treatment with UFH. Moreover, the incidence of overall recurrent thromboembolic events during 10 days of treatment was significantly higher (P < .002) in the UFH group (seven of 67) than in the enoxaparin group (one of 67). There were no serious bleeding complications in either group.
                Enoxaparin is at least as effective and safe as UFH under the conditions of this study. Moreover, it is more comfortable for patients and less time-consuming for nurses and laboratories. Thus, our study confirmed, with the use of enoxaparin, other observations that low-molecular-weight heparin provides a real therapeutic advance in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. In view of the potential of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) to simplify initial therapy and allow outpatient treatment of proximal deep-vein thrombosis, we undertook a randomised comparison of fixed-dose subcutaneous LMWH with adjusted-dose intravenous standard heparin in the initial treatment of this disorder. Our main objectives were to compare the efficacy of these regimens for 6 months of follow-up and to assess the risk of clinically important bleeding. Of 170 consecutive symptomatic patients with venographically proven proximal deep-venous thrombosis, 85 received standard heparin (to achieve an activated partial thromboplastin time of 1.5 to 2.0 times the pretreatment value) and 85 LMWH (adjusted only for body weight) for 10 days. Oral coumarin was started on day 7 and continued for at least 3 months. The frequency of recurrent venous thromboembolism diagnosed objectively did not differ significantly between the standard-heparin and LMWH groups (12 [14%] vs 6 [7%]; difference 7% [95% confidence interval -3% to 15%]; p = 0.13). Clinically important bleeding was infrequent in both groups (3.5% for standard heparin vs 1.1% for LMWH; p greater than 0.2). We conclude that fixed-dose subcutaneous LMWH is at least as effective and safe as intravenous adjusted-dose heparin in the initial treatment of symptomatic proximal-vein thrombosis. Since there is no need for laboratory monitoring with the LMWH regimen, patients with venous thrombosis can be treated at home. The optimal treatment of superficial thrombophlebitis of the leg is undefined. The main study objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of unmonitored high doses as compared to low doses of unfractionated heparin (UFH) for prevention of venous thromboembolic complications in patients with superficial thrombophlebitis of the thigh.
                Sixty consecutive patients with acute thrombophlebitis of the great saphenous vein, as assessed by ultrasonography, were randomized to subcutaneous injection twice daily of UFH in high unmonitored doses (12,500 IU for one week followed by 10,000 IU) or prophylactic doses (5,000 IU) for four weeks. The rate of asymptomatic involvement of the deep venous system and/or symptomatic thromboembolic events during a six-month follow-up period was assessed and compared between the two study groups.
                Six of the 30 patients (20.0 %; 95% CI, 7.7 to 38.6) randomized to low-dose UFH developed symptomatic or asymptomatic events as compared to 1 of the 30 patients (3.3%; 95% CI, 0.07 to 17.2) who received high-dose UFH (p=0.05 by one-sided Fisher's exact test). No patient experienced major bleeding complications in either group.
                The results of this study suggest that in patients with acute thrombophlebitis of the thigh unmonitored high doses of UFH are more effective than prophylactic doses of UFH for prevention of venous thromboembolic complications and do not enhance the risk of bleeding complications. Subcutaneous body weight-adjusted low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has been proven as effective and safe as intravenous aPTT-adjusted unfractionated heparin (UFH) for the treatment of patients with acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT). In this study we evaluate the efficacy of the initial treatment of proximal DVT with a fixed-dose, body weight-independent application of the LMWH Certoparin with a six month follow-up. In a prospective, multicentre, randomized, active-controlled study 1220 patients with objectively diagnosed proximal DVT were randomly assigned to subcutaneous 8000 U anti-factor Xa of Certoparin twice daily for 10 to 14 days or intravenous aPTT-adjusted UFH for 5 to 8 days. Both regimen were followed by oral anticoagulation for 6 months. The primary end point was the rate of symptomatic and objectively confirmed thromboembolic events within 6 months. The aim of the study was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the Certoparin regimen as compared to UFH. The per-protocol analysis revealed 22 (3.8%) thromboembolic events in the Certoparin group and 24 (4.3%) in patients assigned to UFH within 6 months, thereby proving the non-inferiority (p<0.01), confirmed by intent-to-treat analysis (p<0.001). Major bleeding occurred in 6 and 7 patients started on Certoparin or UFH during the treatment period. Thromboembolic events were equally distributed in body weight categories with < 50, 50-80 and >80 kg as followed: 0, 3.6% and 4.1% of patients for the Certoparin group and 0, 4.6% and 4.2% of patients for the UFH group. The same was true for major bleeding complications with 0, 2.9% and 1.5% for Certoparin and 0, 3.5% and 4.2% for UFH. Overall mortality was 1.9% in the Certoparin group and 2.7% in the UFH group. Fixed-dose body weight-independent subcutaneous LMWH Certoparin is at least as efficacious and safe as intravenous aPTT-adjusted UFH for the initial treatment of acute proximal DVT. This effect is maintained during a 6-months follow-up of treatment with oral anticoagulation.
Fixed dose LMWH is more effective and safer than adjusted dose UFH for the initial treatment of VTE. Compared to UFH, LMWH significantly reduced the incidence of thrombotic complications, the occurrence of major haemorrhage during initial treatment and overall mortality at follow up.