Key result
Prophylactic anticoagulation is linked to ~38% less VTE in hospitalized IBD patients without excess bleeding.
Why the study?
Hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism, but the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic anticoagulation in this population needed evaluation.
Does prophylactic anticoagulation reduce venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease?
Cohort (n=56,194)
Does prophylactic anticoagulation reduce venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease?
Effect estimate: HR 0.62 (95% CI 0.41-0.94)
Prophylactic anticoagulation with heparin is associated with a reduced risk of VTE without increasing bleeding risk in hospitalized patients with IBD.
May support prophylaxis in hospitalized IBD; leaves open need for RCTs to confirm benefit and safety.
Hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic anticoagulation compared with no anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with IBD. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a hospital-based database. We included patients with IBD who had a length of hospital stay ≥2 days between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2019. We excluded patients who had other indications for anticoagulation, users of direct oral anticoagulants, warfarin, therapeutic-intensity heparin, and patients admitted for surgery. We defined exposure to prophylactic anticoagulation using charge codes. The primary effectiveness outcome was VTE. The primary safety outcome was bleeding. We used propensity score matching to reduce potential differences between users and nonusers of anticoagulants and Cox proportional-hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The analysis included 56 194 matched patients with IBD (users of anticoagulants, n = 28 097; nonusers, n = 28 097). In the matched sample, prophylactic use of anticoagulants (vs no use) was associated with a lower rate of VTE (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.94) and with no difference in the rate of bleeding (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87-1.26). In this study of hospitalized patients with IBD, prophylactic use of heparin was associated with a lower rate of VTE without increasing bleeding risk compared with no anticoagulation. Our results suggest potential benefits of prophylactic anticoagulation to reduce the burden of VTE in hospitalized patients with IBD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dawwas et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (n=56,194). Prophylactic anticoagulation vs. No anticoagulation was evaluated on Venous thromboembolism (VTE) (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41-0.94). Prophylactic anticoagulation in hospitalized IBD patients was associated with a lower rate of VTE compared with no anticoagulation (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.41-0.94), with no difference in bleeding.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: