Key result
LMWH provides practical and economic benefits over UFH for VTE prophylaxis in medical inpatients.
Why the study?
Acutely ill medical patients are at significant risk of VTE complications during or after hospitalization, and the economic and practical aspects of thromboprophylaxis with UFH and LMWH require evaluation.
What are the economic and practical aspects of thromboprophylaxis with UFH and LMWH in hospitalized medical patients?
What are the economic and practical aspects of thromboprophylaxis with UFH and LMWH in hospitalized medical patients?
LMWHs provide practical and economic advantages over UFH for VTE prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients.
May support thromboprophylaxis in medical inpatients; leaves open optimal risk-stratified thresholds for practice.
Acutely ill medical patients are at significant risk of developing venous thromboembolic (VTE) complications during or after their hospitalization. Venous thromboembolic events, such as proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), place a high and unacceptable burden on health care resources, up to US$1.5 billion annually in the United States. However, the burden of VTE can be reduced by use of appropriate thromboprophylaxis. Prophylaxis of VTE with either a low-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH) or a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in medical inpatients is effective, well tolerated and cost-effective, compared with no prophylaxis. Low-molecular-weight heparins have a number of practical benefits over UFH, including once-daily subcutaneous injection and the potential to be used in the outpatient setting. These clinical advantages could translate to improved patient adherence to therapy and provide economic benefits, where LMWHs are more cost-effective compared with UFH.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pineo et al. (2009) conducted a review in Venous thromboembolic complications in acutely ill medical patients. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) or no prophylaxis was evaluated. Low-molecular-weight heparins provide practical and economic benefits over unfractionated heparin for VTE prophylaxis in medical inpatients, addressing a burden of up to US$1.5 billion annually.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: