Why the study?
Does the choice of asymptomatic versus symptomatic endpoints affect the conclusions of trials comparing enoxaparin and fondaparinux for VTE prophylaxis in orthopaedic surgical patients?
Does the choice of asymptomatic versus symptomatic endpoints affect the conclusions of trials comparing enoxaparin and fondaparinux for VTE prophylaxis in orthopaedic surgical patients?
Trial design factors, particularly the inclusion of asymptomatic VTE in primary endpoints, can significantly alter the perceived efficacy of thromboprophylactic agents like enoxaparin and fondaparinux.
The aim of thromboprophylaxis is to minimise the incidence of clinically relevant venous thromboembolism (VTE) but in many trials designed to determine the efficacy of thromboprophylactic agents, asymptomatic VTE is included in the primary endpoint. Since asymptomatic events occur much more frequently than symptomatic events, they dominate the results. Data from trials comparing the thromboprophylactic efficacy of enoxaparin and fondaparinux in orthopaedic surgical patients are used to demonstrate that asymptomatic and symptomatic endpoints may yield different conclusions. There was no difference between these agents in the incidence of symptomatic VTE. Efficacy and safety results of thromboprophylactic studies are affected by other aspects of trial design such as the dose of each agent and the timing of treatment initiation and endpoint assessment. Such factors should be considered when designing clinical trials and evaluating their results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laurent Lalourcey (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: