Suppr超能文献

低分子量肝素与普通肝素用于癌症患者围手术期血栓预防的比较

Low molecular weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer.

作者信息

Akl Elie A, Labedi Nawman, Terrenato Irene, Barba Maddalena, Sperati Francesca, Sempos Elena V, Muti Paola, Cook Deborah, Schünemann Holger

机构信息

Department of Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Nov 9(11):CD009447. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009447.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The choice of the appropriate perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer depends on the relative benefits and harms of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and unfractionated heparin (UFH).

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence for the relative efficacy and safety of LMWH and UFH for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search for trials of anticoagulation in cancer patients including a February 2010 electronic search of: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI Web of Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled cancer patients undergoing a surgical intervention and compared the effects of LMWH to UFH on mortality, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), bleeding outcomes, and thrombocytopenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors used a standardized form to independently extract in duplicate data on risk of bias, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest. Where possible, we conducted meta-analyses using the random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 8187 identified citations, we included 16 RCTs with 11,847 patients in the meta-analyses, all using preoperative prophylactic anticoagulation. The overall quality of evidence was moderate. The meta-analysis did not conclusively rule out either a beneficial or harmful effect of LMWH compared to UFH for the following outcomes: mortality (RR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.10), symptomatic DVT (RR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.23 to 2.28), PE (RR = 0.59; 95% CI 0.25 to1.41), minor bleeding (RR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.66) and major bleeding (RR = 0.84; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.36). LMWH was associated with lower incidence of wound hematoma (RR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.43, 0.84) while UFH was associated with higher incidence of intra-operative transfusion (RR = 1.16; 95% CI 0.69,1.62).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference between perioperative thromboprophylaxis with LMWH verus UFH in their effects on mortality and embolic outcomes in patients with cancer. Further trials are needed to more carefully evaluate the benefits and harms of different heparin thromboprophylaxis strategies in this population.

摘要

背景

癌症患者围手术期血栓预防措施的选择取决于低分子量肝素(LMWH)和普通肝素(UFH)的相对利弊。

目的

系统评价LMWH和UFH用于癌症患者围手术期血栓预防的相对疗效和安全性的证据。

检索方法

全面检索癌症患者抗凝治疗试验,包括2010年2月对以下数据库的电子检索:Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE和ISI科学网。

选择标准

纳入接受手术干预的癌症患者的随机对照试验(RCT),比较LMWH与UFH对死亡率、深静脉血栓形成(DVT)、肺栓塞(PE)、出血结局和血小板减少症的影响。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者使用标准化表格独立重复提取关于偏倚风险、研究对象、干预措施和感兴趣结局的数据。在可能的情况下,我们使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。

主要结果

在检索到的8187篇文献中,我们在荟萃分析中纳入了16项RCT,共11847例患者,均采用术前预防性抗凝治疗。证据的总体质量为中等。荟萃分析未明确排除LMWH与UFH相比在以下结局方面的有益或有害影响:死亡率(RR = 0.90;95%CI 0.73至1.10)、有症状的DVT(RR = 0.73;95%CI 0.23至2.28)、PE(RR = 0.59;95%CI 0.25至1.41)、轻微出血(RR = 0.88;95%CI 0.47至1.66)和大出血(RR = 0.84;95%CI 0.52至1.36)。LMWH与伤口血肿发生率较低相关(RR = 0.60;95%CI 0.43,0.84),而UFH与术中输血发生率较高相关(RR = 1.16;95%CI 0.69,1.62)。

作者结论

我们发现LMWH与UFH在癌症患者围手术期血栓预防中对死亡率和栓塞结局的影响无差异。需要进一步的试验来更仔细地评估该人群中不同肝素血栓预防策略的利弊。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验