This Article Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Article Archive Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (11) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by King, C. S. Articles by Moores, L. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by King, C. S. Articles by Moores, L. K.

Twice vs Three Times Daily Heparin Dosing for Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in the General Medical Population^*

A Metaanalysis

^* From the Department of Medicine (Dr. King), the Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Service (Dr. Holley), Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC; Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Service, Washington Hospital Center (Dr. Shorr), Washington, DC; and the Department of Medicine (Drs. Jackson and Moores), Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD.

Correspondence to: Lisa K. Moores, MD, FCCP, PCCMS, Bldg 2, WD 77, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, 6900 Georgia Ave NW, Washington, DC 20307; e-mail: Lisa.Moores{at}na.amedd.army.mil

Abstract

Objectives: Prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin (UFH) has been proven to reduce rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized medical patients. While twice-daily (BID) and three-times-daily (TID) dosing regimens have been studied, the two have never been directly compared. We performed a metaanalysis to assess whether TID is superior to BID dosing in the prevention of VTE.

Methods: Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register from 1966 through December 2004 were searched for randomized trials comparing subcutaneously dosed UHF (either BID or TID) with placebo or control for VTE prophylaxis in medical patient populations. Two reviewers independently rated study quality on the basis of predetermined criteria. Data were extracted on patient age, hospital setting, comorbidities, VTE rates, and bleeding complications.

Results: Twelve studies were identified; 7,978 patients (1,664 patients in the TID arm, and 6,314 patients in the BID arm) were included. After adjustment for baseline risk, there was no difference in the overall rate (per 1,000 patient-days) of VTE (BID, 5.4; vs TID, 3.5; p = 0.87). TID heparin showed a trend toward a decrease in pulmonary embolism (PE) [BID, 1.5; vs TID, 0.5; p = 0.09] and in proximal DVT and PE (BID, 2.3; vs TID, 0.9; p = 0.05). The risk for major bleeding was significantly increased with TID heparin (BID, 0.35; vs TID, 0.96; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: BID heparin dosing causes fewer major bleeding episodes, while TID dosing appears to offer somewhat better efficacy in preventing clinically relevant VTE events. Practitioners should use underlying risk for VTE and bleeding to individualize pharmacologic prevention.

Key Words: heparin • primary prevention • thrombosis

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. F. Shorr, W. L. Jackson, J. H. Sherner, and L. K. Moores Differences Between Low-Molecular-Weight and Unfractionated Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism Prevention Following Ischemic Stroke: A Metaanalysis Chest, January 1, 2008; 133(1): 149 - 155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]