Why the study?
Does danaproid sodium reduce venous thromboembolism and bleeding complications compared to unfractionated heparin or control in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery?
Does danaproid sodium reduce venous thromboembolism and bleeding complications compared to unfractionated heparin or control in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery?
Danaproid sodium is an effective and safer alternative to unfractionated heparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip fracture surgery, significantly reducing bleeding complications.
May support danaproid over heparin for VTE prevention after hip fracture surgery; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
PURPOSE: To compare the prevalence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE), and bleeding complications in patients receiving heparin or danaproid after hemiarthroplasty or osteosynthesis for hip fractures. METHODS: 37 men and 138 women aged 47 to 100 (mean, 80) years underwent either hemiarthroplasty or osteosynthesis for hip fractures; 5 patients with dementia were excluded. All patients received preoperative elastic stocking and postoperative intermittent pneumatic compression. They were divided into 3 groups based on their admission period: controls (n=71), unfractionated heparin (n=44), and danaproid sodium (n=55). Drugs were administered from postoperative day 1 to 7. At day 7, all patients undertook radioisotope venography of the legs and lung perfusion scintigraphy. RESULTS: In the control, heparin, and danaproid groups respectively, the DVT rates were 31%, 9.1%, and 5.5%, and the PTE rates were 5.6%, 4.5%, and 1.8%. Only the DVT rate in the control group was significantly higher than that in the heparin and danaproid groups. In the heparin group, one patient had gastrointestinal bleeding, 5 developed wound haematomas, and one had leakage from the drain site for 2 weeks. CONCLUSION: Danaproid sodium appeared more effective and safer than heparin, with no bleeding complications occurred.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nakase et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: