Kearon Clive, O'Donnell Martin
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada.
Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2011 Jan-Feb;121(1-2):40-3.
Pulmonary embolism is the most common preventable cause of death in hospital patients and prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is cost-saving in high-risk patients. Low-dose anticoagulation is very effective at preventing VTE but increases bleeding. Graduated compression stockings and intermittent pneumatic compression devices are also used to prevent VTE and do not increase bleeding, which makes their use appealing in patients who cannot tolerate bleeding, such as patients with acute stroke. Studies that evaluated mechanical methods of preventing VTE were small and mainly used asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT), detected using screening tests, as the study outcome. The recently published CLOTS Trial 1 (Clots in Legs Or sTockings after Stroke) compared thigh-level compression stockings with no stockings in about 2500 patients with stroke and immobility, and found that thigh-level stockings were not effective. Indirectly, the findings of this study question the ability of stockings to prevent VTE in other patient groups, including those after surgery. CLOTS 1 compared thigh-level and below-knee stockings in about 3000 patients with acute stroke. Given that thigh-level stockings were ineffective in CLOTS 1, it is surprising that they were more effective than below-knee stockings in CLOTS Trial 2. A possible explanation is that below-knee stockings increase DVT, although this seems unlikely. CLOTS 1 and CLOTS 2 question whether graduated compression stockings prevent VTE and suggest the need for further trials evaluating their efficacy in medical and surgical patients.
肺栓塞是医院患者中最常见的可预防死亡原因,预防静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)对高危患者具有成本效益。低剂量抗凝在预防VTE方面非常有效,但会增加出血风险。分级压力袜和间歇性气动压迫装置也用于预防VTE,且不会增加出血风险,这使得它们在无法耐受出血的患者(如急性中风患者)中具有吸引力。评估预防VTE机械方法的研究规模较小,主要将通过筛查检测出的无症状深静脉血栓形成(DVT)作为研究结果。最近发表的CLOTS试验1(中风后腿部血栓或袜子试验)在约2500例中风且行动不便的患者中,将大腿中部压力袜与不使用袜子进行了比较,发现大腿中部压力袜无效。间接地,这项研究的结果对压力袜在其他患者群体(包括术后患者)中预防VTE的能力提出了质疑。CLOTS试验1在约3000例急性中风患者中比较了大腿中部压力袜和膝下压力袜。鉴于大腿中部压力袜在CLOTS试验1中无效,令人惊讶的是,在CLOTS试验2中它们比膝下压力袜更有效。一种可能的解释是膝下压力袜会增加DVT,尽管这似乎不太可能。CLOTS试验1和CLOTS试验2对分级压力袜是否能预防VTE提出了疑问,并表明需要进一步试验来评估其在医疗和外科患者中的疗效。