The authors argue that large-scale trials using hard clinical endpoints rather than surrogate endpoints are needed to properly assess the efficacy and safety of chemical thromboprophylaxis following surgery.
Chemoprophylaxis with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin has been shown to reduce deep vein thrombosis detected by surrogate endpoints such as fibrinogen scanning and venography. However, there have been few trials which have assessed clinical endpoints attributed to fatal and non-fatal pulmonary embolism following surgery. As these clinical endpoints are rare, large-scale trials using vascular mortality, vascular morbidity and the incidence of haemorrhage as clinical endpoints need to be performed to assess the efficacy of chemical thromboprophylaxis. The benefit of using clinical endpoints against the risk of haemorrhage should also be evaluated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
C. R. M. Prentice (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: