|
|
||||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Departments of Neurosurgery and Emergency Medicine (Dr. Levine), The University of Texas School of Medicine at Houston, Houston, TX; Statistics and Data Management (Mr. McCollum), CTI Clinical Trial and Consulting Services, Blue Ash, OH; and Thrombosis and Hemostasis (Dr. Hursting), Clinical Science Consulting, Austin, TX.
Correspondence to: Robert L. Levine, MD, FCCP, The University of Texas School of Medicine at Houston, 6431 Fannin, MSB 7.142, Houston, TX 77030; e-mail: rlevine{at}uth.tmc.edu
Abstract
Background: Patients receiving heparin for thromboprophylaxis or treatment may have new or recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) if immune-mediated heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) occurs or for other reasons, eg, if anticoagulation fails. We estimated from the literature how frequently a patient presenting with VTE during or following heparin therapy has HIT-associated VTE.
Methods: A comprehensive, systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies using unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for thromboprophylaxis or treatment in which new or recurrent VTE and serologically confirmed HIT were reported. From extracted study data, the proportion of patients with HIT-associated VTE relative to any VTE was calculated by heparin type and mode of administration.
Results: We identified 10 studies, some with multiple arms, that used unfractionated heparin (IV administration, 5 studies; subcutaneous administration, 3 studies) or subcutaneous LMWH (5 studies) and met analysis criteria. Across these studies, 386 of 6,219 heparin-treated patients had VTE, including 32 patients who also had HIT. The frequency of HIT-associated VTE among heparin-treated patients with VTE was comparable between IV and subcutaneous unfractionated heparin therapy (13.2% [17 of 129 patients] vs 12.4% [14 of 113 patients]; odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.50 to 2.3; p > 0.99) yet significantly different between unfractionated heparin and LMWH therapy (12.8% [31 of 242 patients] vs 0.7% [1 of 144 patients]; odds ratio, 21.0; 95% confidence interval, 2.8 to 156; p < 0.001).
Conclusions: VTE is associated with HIT infrequently (< 1%) in LMWH-treated patients, yet often (approximately one in eight cases) in unfractionated heparin-treated patients. Physicians should suspect the possibility of HIT if VTE develops during or soon after unfractionated heparin use; if thrombocytopenia is present, alternative anticoagulation should be used until HIT is excluded.
Key Words: adverse effects anticoagulant drugs heparin thrombocytopenia thrombosis venous thrombosis
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. A. Morris, S. Castrejon, G. Devendra, and A. C. Gamst No Difference in Risk for Thrombocytopenia During Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism and Deep Venous Thrombosis With Either Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin or Unfractionated Heparin: A Metaanalysis Chest, October 1, 2007; 132(4): 1131 - 1139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. E. Warkentin Think of HIT When Thrombosis Follows Heparin. Chest, September 1, 2006; 130(3): 631 - 632. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |