An open-label randomized controlled trial of low molecular weight heparin compared to heparin and coumadin for the treatment of venous thromboembolic events in children: the REVIVE trial. Can low molecular weight heparin replace unfractionated heparin during peripheral arterial reconstruction? An open label prospective randomized controlled trial. Low molecular weight heparin (Alfa LHWH) compared with unfractionated heparin in prevention of deep-vein thrombosis after hip fractures. Low-molecular-weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in the treatment of patients with acute pulmonary thromboembolism. Subcutaneous adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin vs fixed-dose low-molecular-weight heparin in the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism. High versus low doses of unfractionated heparin for the treatment of superficial thrombophlebitis of the leg. A prospective, controlled, randomized study.
Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are serious complications in children and for which the standard of care, unfractionated heparin followed by oral anticoagulation (UFH/OA), is problematic. The objective of REVIVE was to compare the efficacy and safety of a low molecular weight heparin (reviparin-sodium) to UFH/OA for the treatment of VTE in children.
                This multicenter, open-label study, with blinded central outcome adjudication, randomized patients with objectively confirmed VTE to receive either reviparin-sodium or UFH/OA. Dose adjustments were made using nomograms. The efficacy outcome was based on recurrent VTE and death due to VTE during the 3-month treatment period. The safety outcomes were major bleeding, minor bleeding and death. Due to slow patient accrual, REVIVE was closed prematurely.
                At 3 months, with reviparin-sodium, 2/36 patients (5.6%) had recurrent VTE or death compared to 4/40 patients (10.0%) receiving UFH/OA (odds ratio=0.53; 95% CI=(0.05, 4.00); Fisher's exact test: 2P=0.677). There were 7 major bleeds, 2/36 (5.6%) in the reviparin-sodium group and 5/40 (12.5%) in UFH/OA group (odds ratio=0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.04, 2.76); Fisher's exact test: P=0.435). There were 5 deaths during the study period, 1 (2.8%) in the reviparin-sodium group and 4 (10.0%) in the UFH/OA group. All five deaths were unrelated to VTE but one was due to an intracranial hemorrhage in the UFH/OA group.
                Although limited by small sample size, REVIVE provides valuable information on the incidence of recurrent VTE, major bleeding and problematic issues associated with therapy of VTE in children. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH) on the rate of occlusion and bleeding during peripheral vascular surgery.
                The study was an open label, prospective, randomized trial, carried out by 20 Swedish surgical and vascular surgical departments that report to the Swedish Vascular Registry (SWEDVASC). Study subjects included patients undergoing peripheral vascular procedures, except carotid surgery. Of the 849 patients included, 817 were followed up to 30 days. LMWH (40 mg of enoxaparin) or UFH (5000 IU heparin) was given intravenously immediately before clamping. The same formulation in diluted form was used for vascular rinsing. Main outcome measures included patent reconstruction at day 1, perioperative blood loss, and the percentage of patients requiring protamin. Further, 30-day data for mortality, repeat operation, and recurrent occlusion are reported.
                The mortality rate at 30 days was 2.7%, with no difference between groups. The patency rate at 1 day was 91.2% to 98.4%, depending on diagnosis and type of reconstruction. No difference was recorded between study groups (0.6 < P < 1.0). At 30 days the patency rate was 83.1% to 100% (0.2 < P <.9). Median blood loss was 350 mL (interquartile range [IQR], 200-800 mL) in the LMWH group and 425 mL (IQR, 200-900 mL) in the UFH group (P =.02). Protamin was given to significantly fewer patients in the LMWH group (P =.001). LMWH was comparable to UFH during peripheral vascular reconstruction in terms of 1-day and 30-day graft patency, operative blood loss, and hemorrhagic complications. Protamine was required less often after LMWH. In this randomized trial LMWH was as effective as UFH in preventing thrombosis without excess bleeding or hemorrhagic complications. Efficacy and safety of a low molecular weight heparin (Alfa LMWH) was compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the prevention of post-operative venous thromboembolism after hip fractures. Forty-nine patients were randomized to treatment with Alfa LMWH 7500 anti-Xa coagulometric units twice daily or with UFH 5000 IU t.i.d. Screening for thrombosis was performed with 125-I-fibrinogen leg scanning and strain-gauge plethysmography. Positive results were confirmed by venography. Five patients in the Alfa LMWH group (20 per cent) developed venographycally proven deep vein thrombosis (DVT) versus seven (29 per cent) in the UFH group. One pulmonary embolism and two deaths occurred in the UFH group and none in the LMWH group. No differences in haemorrhagic complications and blood loss indices were observed. Alfa LMWH appears to be a promising drug for prevention of venous thromboembolism after orthopaedic surgery. A "flexible" schedule of administration is proposed on the basis of the results of plasma anti-Xa assays. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) appears to be as effective as unfractionated heparin (UFH) for both treatment and prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), but limited data are available for its use in acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE).
                To determine whether enoxaparin, a LMWH, was clinically as efficient and safe as UFH in patients with a diagnosis of acute PTE.
                After exclusion of those with massive forms, 59 patients with acute PTE were randomly assigned to either subcutaneous enoxaparin given twice daily (1 mg/kg/dose) or adjusted dose intravenous UFH. Oral anticoagulant treatment was begun on the second day and was given for at least 6 months. We compared the treatment regimens at day 8 and day 90 with respect to a combined end point of major bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), and death.
                In the first 8 days of treatment, 1 of 30 patients assigned to receive UFH (3.3%) reached one of the end points (recurrence), as compared with none of 29 patients assigned to enoxaparin. Statistically this difference was not significant (p = 0.508). By day 90, 3 patients assigned to UFH (10%) had symptomatic recurrent VTE, as compared with 1 patient assigned to enoxaparin (3.4%). There was neither major bleeding nor death in the study groups. There was an absolute difference of 6.4 percentage points between the two treatment groups, but the difference was statistically not significant (p = 0.318).
                Initial subcutaneous treatment with enoxaparin appeared to be as effective and safe as UFH in acute PTE.
                Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel Few reports have addressed the value of unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin in treating the full spectrum of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), including recurrent VTE and pulmonary embolism.
                In an open, multicenter clinical trial, 720 consecutive patients with acute symptomatic VTE, including 119 noncritically ill patients (16.5%) with pulmonary embolism and 102 (14.2%) with recurrent VTE, were randomly assigned to treatment with subcutaneous UFH with dose adjusted by activated partial thromboplastin time by means of a weight-based algorithm (preceded by an intravenous loading dose), or fixed-dose (adjusted only to body weight) subcutaneous nadroparin calcium. Oral anticoagulant therapy was started concomitantly and continued for at least 3 months. We recorded the incidence of major bleeding during the initial heparin treatment and that of recurrent VTE and death during 3 months of follow-up.
                Fifteen (4.2%) of the 360 patients assigned to UFH had recurrent thromboembolic events, as compared with 14 (3.9%) of the 360 patients assigned to nadroparin (absolute difference between rates, 0.3%; 95% confidence interval, -2.5% to 3.1%). Four patients assigned to UFH (1.1%) and 3 patients assigned to nadroparin (0.8%) had episodes of major bleeding (absolute difference between rates, 0.3%; 95% confidence interval, -1.2% to 1.7%). Overall mortality was 3.3% in each group.
                Subcutaneous UFH with dose adjusted by activated partial thromboplastin time by means of a weight-based algorithm is as effective and safe as fixed-dose nadroparin for the initial treatment of patients with VTE, including those with pulmonary embolism and recurrent VTE. The optimal treatment of superficial thrombophlebitis of the leg is undefined. The main study objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of unmonitored high doses as compared to low doses of unfractionated heparin (UFH) for prevention of venous thromboembolic complications in patients with superficial thrombophlebitis of the thigh.
                Sixty consecutive patients with acute thrombophlebitis of the great saphenous vein, as assessed by ultrasonography, were randomized to subcutaneous injection twice daily of UFH in high unmonitored doses (12,500 IU for one week followed by 10,000 IU) or prophylactic doses (5,000 IU) for four weeks. The rate of asymptomatic involvement of the deep venous system and/or symptomatic thromboembolic events during a six-month follow-up period was assessed and compared between the two study groups.
                Six of the 30 patients (20.0 %; 95% CI, 7.7 to 38.6) randomized to low-dose UFH developed symptomatic or asymptomatic events as compared to 1 of the 30 patients (3.3%; 95% CI, 0.07 to 17.2) who received high-dose UFH (p=0.05 by one-sided Fisher's exact test). No patient experienced major bleeding complications in either group.
                The results of this study suggest that in patients with acute thrombophlebitis of the thigh unmonitored high doses of UFH are more effective than prophylactic doses of UFH for prevention of venous thromboembolic complications and do not enhance the risk of bleeding complications.
LMWH and UFH had similar risk of mortality, recurrent angina, and major or minor bleeding but LMWH had decreased risk of MI, revascularization and thrombocytopenia. New trials with longer follow up are required.