Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Posttraumatic Thromboprophylaxis Revisited: An Argument Against the Current Methods of DVT and PE Prophylaxis after Injury

  • EDITORIAL REVIEW
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Thromboprophylaxis after injury is a controversial issue. Practices and outcomes vary widely.

Methods

Review of selected trauma literature on venous thromboprophylaxis after injury.

Results

Multiple trauma articles suggest that the efficacy of different methods of thromboprophylaxis is unproven. Most of the practices on this issue are extrapolated from studies which were performed in non-trauma patients and therefore, may not be applicable in the unique trauma population.

Conclusions

In the absence of undisputable evidence, none of the current methods of venous thromboprophylaxis after injury should be considered as standard of care. There is a need to discover new methods of thromboprophylaxis for the Trauma patient.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

VT::

venous thromboembolism;

DVT::

deep venous thrombosis;

PE: :

pulmonary embolism;

UH::

unfractionated heparin;

LMWH::

low molecular weight heparin;

SCD::

sequential compression device;

VCF::

vena cava filter

References

  1. Nathens AB, Rivara FP, Jurkovich GJ, et al. Management of the injured patient: identification of research topics for systematic review using the Delphi technique. J Trauma 2003;54:595–601

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kakkar VV, Corrigan T, Spindler J, et al. Efficacy of low doses of heparin in prevention of deep-vein thrombosis after major surgery. A double-blind, randomised trial. Lancet 1972;2(7768):101–106

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kakkar VV, Corrigan TP, Fossard DP, et al. Prevention of fatal postoperative pulmonary embolism by low doses of heparin. An international multicentre trial. Lancet 1975;2(7924):45–51

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gallus A, et al. Small subcutaneous doses of heparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism. N Engl J med 1973;288:545–549

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Scharnoff JG, Rosen RL, Sadler AH, et al. Prevention of fatal pulmonary thromboembolism by heparin prophylaxis after surgery for hip fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976;58:913–917

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sevitt S, Gallagher N. Venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a clinico-pathological study in injured and burned patients. Br J Surg 1961;48:475–489

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Freeark RJ, Boswick J, Fardin R. Posttraumatic venous thrombosis. Arch Surg 1967;95:567–575

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Shackford SR, Davis JW, Hollingsworth-Fridlund P, et al. Venous thromboembolism in patients with major trauma. Am J Surg 1990;159:365–369

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ruiz AJ, Hill SL, Berry RE. Heparin, deep venous thrombosis, and trauma patients. Am J Surg 1991;162:159–162

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kundson MM, et al. Thromboembolism following multiple trauma. J Trauma 1992;32:2–11

    Google Scholar 

  11. Burns GA, Cohn SM, Frumento RJ, et al. Prospective ultrasound evaluation of venous thrombosis in high-risk trauma patients. J Trauma 1993;35:405–408

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Winchell RJ, Hoyt DB, Walsh JC, et al. Risk factors associated with pulmonary embolism despite routine prophylaxis: implications for improved protection. J Trauma 1994;37:600–606

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Knudson MM, Lewis FR, Clinton A, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism in trauma patients. J Trauma 1994;37:480–487

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Napolitano LM, Garlapati VS, Heard SO, et al. Asymptomatic deep venous thrombosis in the trauma patient: is an aggressive screening protocol justified? J Trauma 1995;39:651–659

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Upchurch GR, Demling RH, Davies J, et al. Efficacy of subcutaneous heparin in prevention of venous thromboembolism in trauma patients. Am Surg 1995;61:749–755

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Greenfield LJ, Proctor MC, Rodriguez JL, et al. Posttrauma thromboembolism prophylaxis. J Trauma 1997;42:100–103

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Velmahos GC, Nigro J, Tatevossian R, et al. Inability of an aggressive policy of thromboprophylaxis to prevent deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in critically injured patients: are current methods of DVT prophylaxis insufficient? J Am Coll Surg 1998;187:529–533

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Duperier T, Mosentahl A, Swan KG, et al. Acute complications associated with Greenfield filter insertion in high-risk patients. J Trauma 2003;54:545–549

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Spinal Cord Injury Thromboprophylaxis Investigators. Prevention of venous thromboembolism in the acute treatment phase after spinal cord injury: a randomized, multicenter trial comparing low-dose heparin plus intermittent pneumatic compression with enoxaparin. J Trauma 2003;54:116–126

    Google Scholar 

  20. Meissner MH, Chandler WL, Elliott JS. Venous thromboembolism in trauma: a local manifestation of systemic hypercoagulability? J Trauma 2003;54:224–231

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gersin K, Grindlinger GA, Lee V, et al. The efficacy of sequential compression devices in multiple trauma patients with severe head injury. J Trauma 1994;37:205–208

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Fisher CG, Blachut PA, Salvian AJ, et al. Effectiveness of pneumatic leg compression devices for the prevention of thromboembolic disease in orthopaedic trauma patients: a prospective randomized study of compression alone versus no prophylaxis. J Orthop Trauma 1995;1:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cornwell EE III, Chang D, Velmahos GC, et al. Compliance with sequential compression device prophylaxis in at-risk trauma patients: a prospective analysis. Am Surg 2002;68:470–473

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Murakami M, McDill TL, Cindrick-Pounds L, et al. Deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in trauma: improved compliance with a novel miniaturized pneumatic compression device. J Vasc Surg 2003;38:923–927

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jacobs DG, Piotrowski JJ, Hoppensteadt DA, et al. Hemodynamic and fibrinolytic consequences of intermittent pneumatic compression: preliminary results. J Trauma 1996;40:710–716

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosenthal D, McKinsey JF, Levy AM, et al. Use of the Greenfield filter in patients with major trauma. Cardiovasc Surg 1994;2:52–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Maxwell RA, Chavarria-Aguilar M, Cockerham WT, et al. Routine prophylactic vena cava filtration is not indicated after acute spinal cord injury. J Trauma 2002;53:1032–1034

    Google Scholar 

  28. McMurtry AL, Owings JT, Anderson JT, et al. Increased use of prophylactic vena cava filters in trauma patients failed to decrease overall incidence of pulmonary embolism. J Am Coll Surg 1999;189:314–320

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Geerts WH, Jay RM, Code KI, et al. A comparison of low-dose heparin with low-molecular weight heparin as prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism after major trauma. N Engl J Med 1996;335:701–707

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Knudson MM, Morabito D, Paiement GD, et al. Use of low molecular weight heparin in preventing thromboembolism in trauma patients. J Trauma 1996;41:446–459

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Ginzburg E, Cohn SM, Lopez J, et al. Randomized clinical trial of intermittent pneumatic compression and low molecular weight heparin in trauma. Br J Surg 2003;90:1338–1344

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Velmahos GC, Kern K, Chan LS, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism after injury: an evidence-based report. J Trauma 2000;49:132–139

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism After Injury. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment, Number 22, Agency for Health Research and Quality, AHRQ Publication No. 01-E004, Nov. 2000

  34. Owings JT, Bagley M, Gosselin R, et al. Effect of critical injury on plasma antithrombin activity: low antithrombin levels are associated with thromboembolic complications. J Trauma 1996;41:396–406

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Heit JA. The potential role of direct thrombin inhibitors in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. Chest 2003;124(3):40S–48S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kaplan RE, Czyrny JJ, Fung TS, et al. Electical foot stimulation and implications for the prevention of venous thromboembolic disease. Thromb Haemost 2002;88:200–204

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pini M. Future prospects of prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 1999;10(2):19S–27S

    Google Scholar 

  38. Gosselin RC, Dager WE, King JH, et al. Effect of direct thrombin inhibitors, bivalirudin, lepirudin, and argatroban, on prothrombin time and INR values. Am J Clin Pathol 2004;123:593–599

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery, and Surgical Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    George C. Velmahos MD, PhD, MSEd

  2. Massachusetts General Hospital, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA

    George C. Velmahos MD, PhD, MSEd

Authors
  1. George C. Velmahos MD, PhD, MSEd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George C. Velmahos MD, PhD, MSEd.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Velmahos, G.C. Posttraumatic Thromboprophylaxis Revisited: An Argument Against the Current Methods of DVT and PE Prophylaxis after Injury. World J. Surg. 30, 483–487 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-0427-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-0427-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation