Treatment of venous thromboembolism

This review provides meta-analytic data of studies aiming at improved treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. The introduction of low molecular weight heparin has considerably ameliorated the initial treatment of deep vein thrombosis, and should now be regarded as the treatment of choice for most patients with deep vein thrombosis. Oral anticoagulant treatment is presently considered safe and effective for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism, provided that the INR is maintained at 2.0-3.0. However, the optimal duration as well as the optimal intensity of anticoagulation have still to be determined. Patients with submassive pulmonary embolism should presently be treated with adjusted dose unfractionated heparin and coumarins. Studies determining the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin in this condition deserve priority. Thrombolytic therapy should be restricted to patients with massive pulmonary embolism, unless safer methods of thrombolysis have been developed. Surgical embolectomy and catheter fragmentation of emboli seem alternative options but deserve further investigations.     

Self-blame and peer victimization in middle school: an attributional analysis

Intravenous heparin followed by warfarin has been the classical anticoagulant therapy of acute venous thromboembolism for the past 30 years. In recent years a number of low-molecular-weight heparins have become available for clinical trials. These agents have a number of advantages over unfractionated heparin and are now being used internationally for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. Low-molecular-weight heparin will undoubtedly replace intravenous unfractionated heparin not only in the treatment of venous thromboembolism but in other conditions where heparin therapy is indicated. Whether or not the low-molecular-weight heparins can decrease or eliminate some of the complications of unfractionated heparin will depend on the outcome of future clinical trials.     

Peptide vaccination with an anchor-replaced CTL epitope protects against human papillomavirus type 16-induced tumors expressing the wild-type epitope

PURPOSE: Upper-extremity thrombosis appears to be more frequent today, comprising about 2% of all deep venous limb thrombosis. Its severity depends on the type of possible complications, i.e., pulmonary embolism and post-thrombotic sequelae. In this retrospective series, we investigated both the predisposing factors and the evolution of upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis. METHODS: Forty-nine consecutive patients (24 men and 25 women, mean age 50.2 years) with upper extremity deep venous thrombosis documented by color Doppler ultrasonography (n = 47) or phlebography (n = 2) were included in the study. RESULTS: Clinical manifestations were mainly pain (81.6%) and edema (93.9%). Mean time between the onset of clinical signs and diagnosis was 7.2 days. Thrombosis involved humeral (26.5%), axillary (46.9%), subclavian (73.5%) and jugular (24.5%) veins. Causative factors were malignancies (32.7%), venous catheters (22.4%), deep venous thrombosis related to effort or thoracic outlet syndrome (22.5%) and thrombophilic states (8.2%). During the 6-month follow-up, six patients developed symptomatic pulmonary embolism (12.2%); one recurrence (2.2%) and 19 post-thrombotic sequelae such as residual edema (36.7%) were also observed. Initial therapy included heparin administration, principally subcutaneous low molecular weight heparins (n = 36/49). CONCLUSION: This series highlights the fact that upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis is mainly secondary to either malignancies or catheterization. Moreover, it confirms that color Doppler ultrasonography may be useful in the diagnosis of the disease and also underlines the high frequency of severe complications, i.e., pulmonary embolism and post-thrombotic sequelae. Finally, this study also demonstrates that low molecular weight heparins should be considered as the initial treatment of choice.     

Increased platelet responsiveness following coronary stenting. Heparin as a possible aetiological factor in stent thrombosis

AIMS: Platelet activation may be a determinant of thrombotic and restenotic complications following intracoronary stenting. In order to measure the effect of stenting on platelet activation antigen expression we used whole blood flow cytometry in 18 patients undergoing Palmaz-Schatz stenting (treated with full anticoagulation) and compared these with a group of 18 patients undergoing elective angioplasty. The effects of low molecular weight heparin and unfractionated heparin on platelet behaviour were also studied, both in vitro and in vivo to determine the contribution of prolonged heparin therapy to platelet activation following stenting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fibrinogen binding to activated GPIIb-IIIa, and surface expression of P-selectin, GPIb and GPIIb-IIIa antigens were measured in unstimulated peripheral blood samples (rest) and on stimulation with adenosine diphosphate (0.1-10 micromol x 1(-1)) and thrombin (0.02-0.16 U x ml(-1)). No changes were seen in resting samples following angioplasty or stenting. Agonist responsiveness was unaltered after angioplasty, but in stented patients antigen expression in response to thrombin was significantly reduced (P< or =0.04), whilst the adenosine diphosphate response was significantly increased (P=0.01). Similar effects were observed in patients with unstable angina treated with either low molecular weight heparin or unfractionated heparin in vivo. In vitro, both unfractionated and low molecular weight heparin inhibited thrombin-induced platelet activation, but stimulation of adenosine diphosphate responses was more marked with unfractionated than low molecular weight heparin. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant increase in platelet responsiveness to adenosine diphosphate following intracoronary stenting in patients treated with conventional anticoagulants. This was probably a consequence of treatment with heparin. Activation of platelets by heparin may explain the increased rate of stent thrombosis in patients treated with anticoagulant therapy. Low molecular weight heparins stimulate platelets less than unfractionated heparin.     

Puerperal thromboprophylaxis: comparison of the anti-Xa activity of enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin

Low molecular weight heparins are used extensively for thromboprophylaxis. The aim of this study was to compare the activity of the low molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin, 20 mg and 40 mg, given once per day with unfractionated heparin, 7500iu given twice per day, in terms of their anti-Xa activity in puerperal women following caesarean section and with an additional risk factor for venous thromboembolism. Seventeen women were randomised to receive one of the three treatments. The anti-Xa activity associated with each treatment was measured prior to treatment and at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours. The mean anti-Xa values of the groups receiving enoxaparin, 20 mg and 40 mg, were significantly higher than those of the group receiving unfractionated heparin. There was no difference between the two enoxaparin groups in terms of the anti-Xa activity profiles. This study suggests that the use of enoxaparin is superior to unfractionated heparin in terms of anti-Xa activity.     

Low molecular weight heparins. Implications in anesthesia and resuscitation

Low molecular weight heparins are a group of drugs that have only recently been introduced in clinical practice. The are widely used for prophylaxis in thromboembolic disease and are being employed increasingly to treat established venous thrombosis. One way in which these drugs are often used is for prophylaxis in the perioperative period for patients at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism, and the anesthesiologist must therefore be familiar with the main aspects of this application. We review pharmacological characteristics of these drugs as well as the literature on low molecular weight heparins, stressing points of main interest to the anesthesiologist and intensive care recovery unit specialist, namely adverse effects (mainly bleeding) and the implications that use of low molecular weight heparin will have on choice of anesthetic (in particular the dilemma of whether to use local/regional anesthesia).     

Low molecular weight heparins: a valuable tool in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes

Standard heparin, low molecular weight heparin and aspirin are at present the only antithrombotic agents of proven value in the initial treatment of patients with an acute coronary syndrome. The combined use of aspirin and one of the heparins for at least 6 days should be considered for all such patients. With their high bio-availability after subcutaneous injection and prolonged half-life, low molecular weight heparins simplify short-term treatment in the acute phase and enable long-term therapy to be maintained on an outpatient basis without the need for repeated laboratory monitoring of anticoagulant effects. Such long-term therapy would appear to be beneficial, at least in high-risk patients, in the light of increasing evidence that the underlying lesion in acute coronary syndromes resolves over a period of weeks or months.     

New antithrombotic agents

The wide range of compounds currently being developed is the result of the continuing need for validated new antithrombotic agents. The prevention and treatment of venous thrombosis is predominated by anticoagulants: low molecular weight heparins, and potentially new antithrombin agents including hirudin. The effectiveness of new antiplatelet agents, and particularly c7E3 and integrelin, confirms the hypothesis concerning the role played by platelets in thrombogenesis in coronary arteries. But, due to the proaggregating effect of thrombin, anticoagulants could also have an important role in preventing arterial clots, either when given alone or in combination. Finally, the development of antithrombin and anti-platelet-glycoprotein IIb IIIa given orally is one of the major objectives of current research. Until the ideal antithrombotic agent is discovered, multiple-drug regimens combining anticoagulants and/or antiplatelet agents could be proposed in patients with a very high risk of thrombosis. Such regimens must taken into account the increased risk of bleeding and be adapted on the basis of careful laboratory surveillance.     

Differential interactions of heparin and heparan sulfate glycosaminoglycans with the selectins. Implications for the use of unfractionated and low molecular weight heparins as therapeutic agents

The selectins are calcium-dependent C-type lectins that bind certain sialylated, fucosylated, sulfated glycoprotein ligands. L-selectin also recognizes endothelial proteoglycans in a calcium-dependent manner, via heparan sulfate (HS) glycosaminoglycan chains enriched in unsubstituted glucosamine units. We now show that these HS chains can also bind P-selectin, but not E-selectin. However, while L-selectin binding requires micromolar levels of free calcium, P-selectin recognition is largely divalent cation-independent. Despite this, HS chains bound to P-selectin are eluted by ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA), but only at high concentrations. Porcine intestinal mucosal (mast cell-derived) heparin (PIM-heparin) shows similar properties, with no binding to E-selectin, calcium-dependent binding of a subfraction to L-selectin and to P-selectin, and calcium-independent binding of a larger fraction to P-selectin, the latter being disrupted by high EDTA concentrations. Analysis of defined heparin fragment pools shows a size dependence for interaction, with tetradecasaccharides showing easily detectable binding to L- and P-selectin affinity columns. L-selectin binding fragments include more heavily sulfated and epimerized regions and, as with the endothelial HS chains, they are enriched in free amino groups. The P-selectin binding component includes this fraction as well as some less highly modified regions. Thus, endothelium-derived HS chains and mast cell-derived heparins could play a role in modulating the biology of selectins in vivo. Notably, P- and L-selectin binding to sialyl-Lewisx and to HL-60 cells (which are known to carry the native ligand PSGL-1) is inhibited by unfractionated pharmaceutical heparin preparations at concentrations 12-50-fold lower than those recommended for effective anticoagulation in vivo. In contrast, two low molecular weight heparins currently considered as clinical replacements for unfractionated heparin are much poorer inhibitors. Thus, patients undergoing heparin therapy for other reasons may be experiencing clinically significant inhibition of L- and P-selectin function, and the current switchover to low-molecular weight heparins may come at some loss of this effect. Low-dose unfractionated heparin should be investigated as a treatment option for acute and chronic diseases in which P- and L-selectin play pathological roles.     

Efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin in renal transplantation

BACKGROUND: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a common problem with potentially devastating results in patients undergoing major surgical procedures. Certain renal transplant recipients are particularly at risk for allograft loss as a consequence of renal vein and artery thrombosis. Over the past few years, low molecular weight heparin has been well established as an accepted modality of treatment and prophylaxis of DVT. The efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin in the prophylaxis of DVT following renal transplantation in adults has not previously been reported. METHODS: Dalteparin was administered to 120 adult renal transplant recipients postoperatively at the Oregon Health Sciences University. RESULTS: No patient developed allograft arterial or venous thrombosis. One patient developed subclavian vein thrombosis. No bleeding complications were encountered, and side effects were very minimal. CONCLUSION: Prophylaxis with dalteparin is an effective and safe modality for the prevention of thrombosis in adult patients undergoing renal transplantation.     

Pharmacokinetic optimisation of the treatment of deep vein thrombosis

The current treatment for deep vein thrombosis is a 5- to 10-day course of heparin followed by 3 to 6 months of oral anticoagulants. Both heparin and oral anticoagulants present a high inter- and intra-individual variability and require individualisation and monitoring of their dosage. The pharmacokinetic properties of heparin have been difficult to assess through the radiolabelling procedures typically used for many other drugs. This is partially a result of the heterogeneous nature of heparin. Thus, the pharmacokinetics of heparin are expressed in terms of its pharmacodynamic activity. Improved coagulation test methodology coupled with the incorporation of patient factors such as bodyweight, height, baseline coagulation status, pretreatment heparin sensitivity and heparin concentrations, can be used to improve the accuracy of heparin dosage determination. Computer-based systems are now available to assist clinicians in quantitating dosage requirements, estimating bleeding risks, and storing patient dose-response relationships for future therapy monitoring. Low molecular weight heparin products might improve our ability to control anticoagulant therapy because drug concentration, as well as the effect on the clotting system, will be more predictable in patients receiving these products. In addition, low molecular weight heparins produce a more consistent, predictable anticoagulant response, and clinicians have a new pharmacological tool which may readily lend itself to patient-controlled, home-based anticoagulant pharmacotherapy. Where pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics could contribute to the optimisation of warfarin treatment is in the initiation of treatment, the estimation of the dosage required, the methods for drug monitoring, the assessment of unusual responses and the avoidance of drug interactions. Traditional pharmaco kinetic methods have limited applicability to the optimisation of warfarin therapy because there is no direct relationship between drug concentration and therapeutic effect. However, a variety of simple or sophisticated computer-assisted methods have been developed to help clinicians in individualising and monitoring warfarin treatment. New therapeutic approaches, such as direct thrombin inhibitors and thrombolytic agents, could overcome some limitations of the standard heparin plus oral anticoagulation therapy.     

Low molecular weight heparins in special populations

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) are replacing unfractionated heparin (UH) as safe and effective agents for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolism. Although LMWH offer many advantages over UH, usage is less clearly defined in certain special populations, including renal dysfunction, obesity and pregnancy. This article will briefly review the pharmacology of LMWH and discuss usage in these special populations.     

Venous thromboembolism in multiple trauma patients

Thromboembolic complications are frequent in patients with multiple trauma. The efficacy of unfractionated heparin for venous thrombosis prophylaxis has not been established. Based on limited prospective data, low-molecular-weight heparin appears to be more effective than unfractionated heparin and at least as effective as compression devices for preventing thromboembolic complications in these patients. Vena cava filters should be considered in high-risk patients who cannot receive anticoagulant therapy, but long-term filter use without concomitant anticoagulant therapy is associated with a substantial risk of recurrent thromboembolism.     

Abbreviated hospitalization for deep venous thrombosis with the use of ardeparin

BACKGROUND: Ardeparin sodium has recently received approval by the Food and Drug Administration for prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing elective total knee replacement. However, this low-molecular-weight heparin has not been previously evaluated in a randomized controlled trial for treatment of established acute deep venous thrombosis. METHODS: The study included patients with ultrasound-documented acute symptomatic deep venous thrombosis of the legs. They had to be deemed appropriate for discharge home to receive subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin. Patients were randomized to receive ardeparin with a 2-day hospitalization or unfractionated heparin sodium with a 5-day hospitalization. Both groups received warfarin sodium. Follow-up ultrasound examinations were undertaken at 6 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 80 patients enrolled, 75 had follow-up ultrasonography. Evaluation of baseline vs 6-week venous scans demonstrated that, overall, 31 of the 39 ardeparin-treated patients improved, compared with 21 of the 36 patients assigned to receive unfractionated heparin (P=.05). The 95% confidence interval for the difference in improvement was 0.6% to 42% in favor of ardeparin. Median charges for ardeparin and unfractionated heparin were $2815 and $6500, respectively (P<.001). There were no differences in bleeding or patient satisfaction between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this small preliminary trial suggest that ardeparin can be administered effectively and safely to selected patients with acute deep venous thrombosis and that, with proper nursing and home services, it can help decrease the duration of hospitalization.     

Ambulatory therapy of acute deep thrombophlebitis

A 53-year-old man developed deep vein thrombosis seven days after arthroscopic meniscectomy. He was successfully treated at home with a low-molecular-weight heparin followed by oral anticoagulation. Today, low-molecular-weight heparins are the initial treatment of choice for acute deep vein thrombosis. Due to the simplicity of administration, they have the potential for allowing home treatment. Several recently published randomised and controlled studies have demonstrated the feasibility, safety and efficacy of home treatment.     

Hereditary antithrombin deficiency and pregnancy. Pregnancy course in six women with known hereditary antithrombin deficiency

Inherited antithrombin (AT) deficiency is a major cause of venous thromboembolism, especially in relation to surgery and pregnancy. We present six AT deficient pregnant women, who successfully delivered seven babies at the Department of Gynaecology/Obstetrics, Aalborg Hospital. From conception, or if possible prior to conception, the women were treated with unfractionated (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) throughout the pregnancy. If the pregnancy was without complication, AT substitution was only used at delivery and for approximately a week post-partum, when warfarin treatment was re-instituted.     

Preventing the cardiotoxic effects of anthracyclines with Cardioxane]

An immune response to heparin, which is clinically manifested by the development of thrombocytopenia with or without thrombosis, is stimulated by a complex of heparin with platelet factor 4 (PF4). The primary thrombotic events in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) are more frequently venous than arterial. The development of antibodies, however, does not always result in thrombocytopenia or in catastrophic events. The antibodies, which are of the IgG, IgM, and IgA isotypes, can be easily measured by an ELISA that contains a complex of heparin-platelet factor 4 (PF4). Initial antibody formation can be greatly reduced by limiting the exposure to unfractionated heparin or by the use of low-molecular-weight heparin. For those patients who require anticoagulation and who have antibodies to heparin-PF4, danaparoid (Orgaran), a low-molecular weight heparinoid that does not react with the antibodies, is now commercially available; argatroban, a thrombin-specific inhibitor, can also be obtained for compassionate use. The use of these agents during anticoagulation with warfarin is preferable to the simple discontinuation of heparin and intitiation of warfarin, because the latter treatment can result in ongoing thrombosis.     

A clinical trial of vena caval filters in the prevention of pulmonary embolism in patients with proximal deep-vein thrombosis. Prévention du Risque d'Embolie Pulmonaire par Interruption Cave Study Group

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of vena caval filters in the prevention of pulmonary embolism in patients with proximal deep-vein thrombosis is still a matter of debate. METHODS: Using a two-by-two factorial design, we randomly assigned 400 patients with proximal deep-vein thrombosis who were at risk for pulmonary embolism to receive a vena caval filter (200 patients) or no filter (200 patients), and to receive low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin, 195 patients) or unfractionated heparin (205 patients). The rates of recurrent venous thromboembolism, death, and major bleeding were analyzed at day 12 and at two years. RESULTS: At day 12, two patients assigned to receive filters (1.1 percent), as compared with nine patients assigned to receive no filters (4.8 percent), had had symptomatic or asymptomatic pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 0.22; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.90). At two years, 37 patients assigned to the filter group (20.8 percent), as compared with 21 patients assigned to the no-filter group (11.6 percent), had had recurrent deep-vein thrombosis (odds ratio, 1.87; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.10 to 3.20). There were no significant differences in mortality or the other outcomes. At day 12, three patients assigned to low-molecular-weight heparin (1.6 percent), as compared with eight patients assigned to unfractionated heparin (4.2 percent), had had symptomatic or asymptomatic pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 0.38; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.10 to 1.38). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients with proximal deep-vein thrombosis, the initial beneficial effect of vena caval filters for the prevention of pulmonary embolism was counterbalanced by an excess of recurrent deep-vein thrombosis, without any difference in mortality. Our data also confirmed that low-molecular-weight heparin was as effective and safe as unfractionated heparin for the prevention of pulmonary embolism.     

Treatment of venous thromboembolism

There have been some important advances in the treatment of venous thromboembolism during the past 18 months. A randomized trial has confirmed earlier observations indicating an adequate initial heparin effect is required to prevent recurrent venous thromboembolism, and it is critical to achieve this effect within the first 24 hours of therapy. The need to use a validated protocol for administering intravenous heparin is now firmly established. The clinician has a choice between two protocols that have been validated by randomized trials and provide both effective and safe heparin therapy. For patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism, the clinician now has a practical noninvasive strategy that avoids pulmonary angiography, identifies patients with proximal-vein thrombosis who require treatment, and avoids the need for treatment and further investigation in the majority of patients.     

New anticoagulant strategies

The limitations of standard heparin have prompted the development of a variety of newer antithrombotic agents. In fact, a LMWH preparation has recently been approved for clinical use in North America. Of these novel preparations, LMWH, the direct thrombin inhibitors, and inhibitors of GPIIb-IIIa have been used clinically and are in advanced stages of evaluation. Not only is LMWH effective in the prevention of venous thromboembolic disease in high-risk patients, but its more predictable dose response makes it an ideal candidate for the treatment of venous thrombosis. Further studies are needed to determine whether LMWH is superior to standard heparin as adjunctive therapy in patients undergoing coronary thrombolysis or angioplasty. Particularly promising in the setting of arterial thrombosis are hirudin, hirulog, and 7E3. With the encouraging results reported to date, it is likely that these agents will soon find their way into the treatment armamentarium of arterial thrombosis.