Optimal Anticoagulation Strategies for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients: A Comprehensive Review of Evidence-Based Practices
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Hospitalized patients, particularly those with reduced mobility, postoperative status, or critical illness, are at an elevated risk of developing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and subsequent venous thromboembolism (VTE). Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis remains a cornerstone in mitigating this risk, yet the selection of anticoagulant agents, dosing regimens, and patient-specific factors necessitate careful consideration.
Objective: This review evaluates current evidence on anticoagulation strategies for DVT prevention in hospitalized patients, including pharmacologic options (unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, direct oral anticoagulants, and fondaparinux), risk stratification models, and special populations (renal impairment, obesity, and thrombocytopenia).
Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, focusing on randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, and clinical guidelines from major societies (ACCP, ASH, and ISTH).
Results: Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) remain the preferred choice for most hospitalized patients due to their predictable pharmacokinetics and reduced monitoring requirements. However, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are emerging as viable alternatives in select populations. Risk assessment tools such as the Padua and IMPROVE scores enhance personalized prophylaxis. Bleeding risk must be carefully weighed against thrombotic benefits, particularly in patients with comorbidities.
Conclusion: Individualized anticoagulation strategies, guided by risk stratification and patient-specific factors, are essential for effective DVT prophylaxis in hospitalized patients. Future research should focus on optimizing DOAC use in acute care settings and refining protocols for high-risk subgroups.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
I. Ho KM, Litton E: Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized elderly patients: time to consider a 'MUST' strategy. J Geriatr Cardiol. 2011, 8:114-20. 10.3724/SP.J.1263.2011.00114
II. Phillippe HM: Overview of venous thromboembolism. Am J Manag Care. 2017, 23:376-82.
III. Stashenko GJ, Tapson VF: Prevention of venous thromboembolism in medical patients and outpatients. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2009, 6:356-63. 10.1038/nrcardio.2009.33
IV. Colling ME, Tourdot BE, Kanthi Y: Inflammation, infection and venous thromboembolism. Circ Res. 2021, 11:2017-36. 10.1161/circresaha.121.318225
V. Heit JA: Epidemiology of venous thromboembolism. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2015, 12:464-74. 10.1038/nrcardio.2015.83
VI. Learn About Healthcare-Associated Venous Thromboembolism. (2018). Accessed: September 19, 2023: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/dvt/ha-vte.html.
VII. Spencer FA, Gore JM, Lessard D, Douketis JD, Emery C, Goldberg RJ: Patient outcomes after deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: the Worcester Venous Thromboembolism Study. Arch Intern Med. 2008, 168:425-30. 10.1001/archinternmed.2007.69
VIII. Hunter R, Noble S, Lewis S, Bennett P: Long-term psychosocial impact of venous thromboembolism: a qualitative study in the community. BMJ Open. 2019, 9:e024805. 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024805
IX. Leizorovicz A, Cohen AT, Turpie AG, Olsson CG, Vaitkus PT, Goldhaber SZ: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of dalteparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Circulation. 2004, 110:874-9. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000138928.83266.24
X. Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY, et al.: A comparison of enoxaparin with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. N Engl J Med. 1999, 341:793-800. 10.1056/NEJM199909093411103
XI. Kahn SR, Lim W, Dunn AS, et al.: Prevention of VTE in nonsurgical patients. Chest. 2012, 141:195-226. 10.1378%2Fchest.11-2296
XII. Crowther M, Lim W: Low molecular weight heparin and bleeding in patients with chronic renal failure. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2007, 13:409-13. 10.1097/MCP.0b013e328216430d
XIII. Schrag D, Uno H, Rosovsky R, et al.: Direct oral anticoagulants vs low-molecular-weight heparin and recurrent VTE in patients with cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2023, 329:1924-33. 10.1001/jama.2023.7843
XIV. Longo de Oliveira AL, de Oliveira Pereira RF, Agati LB, et al.: Rivaroxaban Versus Enoxaparin for Thromboprophylaxis After major Gynecological Cancer Surgery: The VALERIA Trial : Venous thromboembolism prophylAxis after gynecoLogical pElvic cancer surgery with RIvaroxaban versus enoxAparin (VALERIA trial). Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2022, 28:10760296221132556. 10.1177/10760296221132556
XV. Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS, et al.: Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial. BMJ. 2006, 332:325-9. 10.1136/bmj.38733.466748.7C
XVI. Pappalardo F, Scandroglio A, Maj G, Zangrillo A, D'Angelo A: Treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia after cardiac surgery: preliminary experience with fondaparinux. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010, 139:790-2. 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.11.032
XVII. Wein L, Wein S, Haas SJ, Shaw J, Krum H: Pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2007, 167:1476-86. 10.1001/archinte.167.14.1476