Key result
Dabigatran etexilate was non-inferior to enoxaparin for total venous thromboembolism (3.8% for 150 mg, 3.0% for 220 mg vs 3.3%), but failed non-inferiority vs enoxaparin 30 mg twice daily.
Why the study?
Is dabigatran etexilate non-inferior to enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in adults undergoing elective total hip or knee replacement?
Is dabigatran etexilate non-inferior to enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in adults undergoing elective total hip or knee replacement?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.8% vs 3.3%
Dabigatran etexilate is a viable, orally active alternative to enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery, offering stable pharmacokinetics without the need for routine monitoring.
Dabigatran non-inferiority holds only versus select enoxaparin doses; leaves open optimal oral thromboprophylaxis after hip or knee replacement.
Dabigatran etexilate was recently approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration for thromboprophylactic use in adults undergoing elective total hip or knee replacement. Dabigatran etexilate is the prodrug of the active moiety dabigatran, an orally active agent that could replace enoxaparin in some clinical indications. Dabigatran is a direct thrombin inhibitor; it has stable, predictable pharmacokinetics and does not require routine monitoring. Pooled efficacy data from large-scale phase III clinical trials of dabigatran use in orthopaedic thromboprophylaxis have shown non-inferiority to enoxaparin, with total venous thromboembolism results of 3.8% for dabigatran etexilate 150 mg and 3.0% for dabigatran etexilate 220 mg, compared with 3.3% for enoxaparin. Pooled safety results for dabigatran are similar to those for enoxaparin, with major bleeding rates of 1.1% for dabigatran etexilate 150 mg and 1.4% for dabigatran etexilate 220 mg, compared with 1.4% for enoxaparin. Dabigatran failed to demonstrate non-inferiority compared with enoxaparin 30 mg twice daily for orthopaedic thromboprophylaxis. Issues relating to the use of dabigatran include its lack of antidote, limited application in renal disease, and interaction with drugs such as amiodarone and verapamil. Several trials investigating the use of dabigatran for other indications, such as stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndromes, are underway. Given its safety profile, efficacy, oral bioavailability and stable pharmacokinetic properties, dabigatran may be a viable alternative to enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abhishek Verma (2010) conducted a review in Orthopaedic thromboprophylaxis. Dabigatran etexilate vs. Enoxaparin was evaluated on Total venous thromboembolism. Dabigatran etexilate was non-inferior to enoxaparin for total venous thromboembolism (3.8% for 150 mg, 3.0% for 220 mg vs 3.3%), but failed non-inferiority vs enoxaparin 30 mg twice daily.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: