Complications related to deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in trauma: a systematic review of the literature

Deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis is essential to the appropriate management of multisystem trauma patients. Without thromboprophylaxis, the rate of venous thrombosis and subsequent pulmonary embolism is substantial. Three prophylactic modalities are common: pharmacologic anticoagulation, mechanical compression devices, and inferior vena cava filtration. A systematic review was completed using PRISMA guidelines to evaluate the potential complications of DVT prophylactic options. Level one evidence currently supports the use of low molecular weight heparins for thromboprophylaxis in the trauma patient. Unfortunately, multiple techniques are not infrequently required for complex multisystem trauma patients. Each modality has potential complications. The risks of heparin include bleeding and heparin induced thrombocytopenia. Mechanical compression devices can result in local soft tissue injury, bleeding and patient non-compliance. Inferior vena cava filters migrate, cause inferior vena cava occlusion, and penetrate the vessel wall. While the use of these techniques can be life saving, they must be appropriately utilized

Danaparoid cross-reactivity with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia antibodies: report of 12 cases.

PURPOSE: Danaparoid is a safe and effective drug for the treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). We describe an uncommon complication: danaparoid cross-reactivity with HIT antibodies. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective observational multicenter study on HIT was conducted in France. In this study concerning HIT patients treated with lepirudin, 12 patients were treated with lepirudin because danaparoid cross-reacted with the heparin-dependent antibodies. RESULTS: Three groups of situations can be separated. In a first group, four patients received a short course of danaparoid until their initial functional HIT assay showed a cross-reactivity between danaparoid and HIT antibodies. One patient presented a fatal thrombotic complication but the relationship between this thrombotic complication and danaparoid cross-reactivity cannot be certain. In a second group, four patients received for 4 days at least a danaparoid treatment while the initial functional test did not show any danaparoid cross-reactivity. During danaparoid treatment, no significant increase of platelet count was observed and two patients presented a fatal thrombotic complication. In a third group, cross-reactivity between danaparoid and HIT antibodies was not checked before danaparoid therapy. During danaparoid treatment, no significant increase of platelet count was observed and the four patients developed a venous thromboembolic complication. CONCLUSION: Absence of any increase in platelet count after 3 to 5 days of danaparoid therapy and/or the occurrence of a new thrombotic event should lead to danaparoid cross-reactivity suspicion. However, before attributing thrombotic complications to danaparoid cross-reactivity, it is crucial to verify that the patients received the recommended danaparoid dosage regimen

Heparin for assisted reproduction

Background Heparin as an adjunct in assisted reproduction (peri-implantation heparin) is given at or after egg collection or at embryo transfer during assisted reproduction. Heparin has been advocated to improve embryo implantation and clinical outcomes. It has been proposed that heparin enhances the intra-uterine environment by improving decidualisation with an associated activation of growth factors and a cytokine expression profile in the endometrium that is favourable to pregnancy. Objectives To investigate whether the administration of heparin around the time of implantation (peri-implantation heparin) improves clinical outcomes in subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction. Search methods A comprehensive and exhaustive search strategy was developed in consultation with the Trials Search Co-ordinator of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG). The strategy was used in an attempt to identify all relevant studies regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press, and in progress). Relevant trials were identified from both electronic databases and other resources (last search 6 May 2013). Selection criteria All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included where peri-implantation heparin was given during assisted reproduction. Peri-implantation low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) during IVF/ICSI was given at or after egg collection or at embryo transfer in the included studies. Live birth rate was the primary outcome. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and quality of trials and extracted relevant data. The quality of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE methods. Main results Three RCTs (involving 386 women) were included in the review. Peri-implantation LMWH administration during assisted reproduction was associated with a significant improvement in live birth rate compared with placebo or no LMWH (odds ratio (OR) 1.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 2.90, three studies, 386 women, I2 = 51%, very low quality evidence with high heterogeneity). There was also a significant improvement in the clinical pregnancy rate with use of LMWH (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.53, three studies, 386 women, I2 = 29%, very low quality evidence with low heterogeneity). However these findings should be interpreted with extreme caution as they were dependent upon the choice of statistical method: they were no longer statistically significant when a random-effects model was used. Adverse events were poorly reported in all included studies, with no comparative data available. However, LMWH did cause adverse effects including bruising, ecchymosis, bleeding, thrombocytopenia and allergic reactions. It appeared that these adverse effects were increased if heparin therapy was used over a longer duration. Authors' conclusion