Ximelagatran versus warfarin for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in major orthopedic surgery: systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Apixaban versus enoxaparin in elective major orthopedic surgery: a clinical review

Despite current guidelines recommendations about anticoagulant prophylaxis, many studies have shown an high venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence in patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty. A number of anticoagulants are currently available, but they have some limitations that affect their applicability and consequently their effectiveness. Several new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been developed in an attempt to overcome these limitations. Apixaban is a NOAC that selectively inhibits the coagulation factor Xa; it is approved for the prevention of VTE after total hip replacement and total knee replacement surgery. This review examines the results of main trials designed to test efficacy and safety of apixaban in major elective orthopedic surgery.

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of new anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgeries, compared with enoxaparin

BACKGROUND

In the past 10 years, new anticoagulants (NACs) have been studied for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk/benefit profile of NACs versus enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of double-blind randomized phase III studies was performed. The search strategy was run from 2000 to 2011 in the main medical electronic databases in any language. Independent extraction of articles was performed by 2 authors using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators.

RESULTS

Fifteen published clinical trials evaluating fondaparinux, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban were included. Primary efficacy (any deep vein thrombosis [DVT], nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or all-cause mortality) favored fondaparinux (relative risk [RR] 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39, 0.63) and rivaroxaban (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.34, 0.73) over enoxaparin, although significant heterogeneity was observed in both series. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 220 mg, apixaban, and bemiparin were similar, with RRs of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.86, 1.20), 0.63 (95% CI, 0.39, 1.01), and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.65, 1.17), respectively. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 150 mg (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03, 1.41), was inferior to enoxaparin. The incidence of proximal DVT favored apixaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0.75) only. Rivaroxaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0,77) and apixaban (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.90) produced significantly lower frequencies of symptomatic DVT. The incidence of major VTE favored rivaroxaban (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.25, 0.81), only. Bleeding risk was similar for all NACs, except fondaparinux (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.55), which exhibited a significantly higher any-bleeding risk compared with enoxaparin, and apixaban (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99), which was associated with a reduced risk of any bleeding. Alanine amino transferase was significantly lower with 220 mg of dabigatran, (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99) than with enoxaparin.

CONCLUSIONS

NACs can be considered alternatives to conventional thromboprophylaxis regimens in patients undergoing elective major orthopedic surgery, depending on clinical characteristics and cost-effectiveness. The knowledge of some differences concerning efficacy or safety profile, pointed out in this systematic review, along with the respective limitations, may be useful in clinical practice.

[Evidence-based practices published in Brazil: identification and analysis of their types and methodological approches]

This is an integrative review of Brazilian studies on evidence-based practices (EBP) in health, published in ISI/JCR journals in the last 10 years. The aim was to identify the specialty areas that most accomplished these studies, their foci and methodological approaches. Based on inclusion criteria, 144 studies were selected. The results indicate that most EBP studies addressed childhood and adolescence, infectious diseases, psychiatrics/mental health and surgery. The predominant foci were prevention, treatment/rehabilitation, diagnosis and assessment. The most used methods were systematic review with or without meta-analysis, protocol review or synthesis of available evidence studies, and integrative review. A strong multiprofessional expansion of EBP is found in Brazil, contributing to the search for more selective practices by collecting, recognizing and critically analyzing the produced knowledge. The study also contributes to the analysis itself of ways to do research and new research possibilities.