Retrospective Analysis of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin and Unfractionated Heparin in Pediatric Trauma Patients: A Comparative Analysis

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after pediatric trauma

In recent years, there has been an increased focus on developing and validating venous thromboprophylaxis guidelines in the pediatric trauma population. We review the current literature regarding the incidence of and risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and the use of prophylaxis in the pediatric trauma population. Risk factors such as age, injury severity, central venous catheters, mental status, injury type, surgery, and comorbidities can lead to a higher incidence of VTE. Risk stratification tools have been developed to determine whether mechanical and/or pharmacologic prophylaxis should be implemented depending on the degree of VTE risk. When VTE risk is high, pharmacologic prophylaxis, such as with low molecular weight heparin, is often initiated. However, the timing and duration of VTE prophylaxis is dependent on patient factors including ambulatory status and contraindications such as bleeding. In addition, the utility of screening ultrasound for VTE surveillance has been evaluated and though they are not widely recommended, no formal guidelines exist. While more research has been done in recent years to assess the most appropriate type, timing, and duration of VTE prophylaxis, further studies are warranted to create optimal guidelines for decreasing the risk of VTE after pediatric trauma.

The survival benefit of low molecular weight heparin over unfractionated heparin in pediatric trauma patients

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in pediatric patients is controversial and is mainly dependent on protocols derived from adult practices. Our study aimed to compare outcomes among pediatric trauma patients who received low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) compared to those who received unfractionated heparin (UFH).

METHODS

We performed 2 years (2015-2016) retrospective analysis of the Pediatrics ACS-TQIP database. Pediatric trauma patients (age ≤17) who received thromboprophylaxis with either LMWH or UFH were included. Patients were stratified into three age groups. Analysis of each subgroup and the entire cohort was performed. Outcome measures included VTE events (deep vein thrombosis [DVT] and pulmonary embolism [PE]), hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS) among survivors, and mortality. Propensity score matching was used to match the two cohorts LMWH vs UFH.

RESULTS

A matched cohort of 1,678 pediatric trauma patients was analyzed. A significant difference in survival, DVT events, and in-hospital LOS was seen in the age groups above 9 years. Overall, the patients who received LMWH had lower mortality (1.4% vs 3.6%, p<0.01), DVT (1.7% vs 3.7%, p<0.01), and hospital LOS among survivors (7 days vs 9 days, p<0.01) compared to those who received UFH. There was no significant difference in the ICU LOS among survivors and the incidence of PE between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

LMWH is associated with increased survival, lower rates of DVT, and decreased hospital LOS compared to UFH among pediatric trauma patients age 10-17 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III Prophylactic.

STUDY TYPE

Prophylactic.