Broken Bones and Thromboprophylaxis: Is Aspirin Enough?


res360

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common cause of preventable death in hospitalized medical patients, yet pharmacologic prophylaxis remains underutilized. The Virchow’s triad of venous stasis, vascular injury, and hypercoagulability is key in the assessment of VTE risk. Based on the Padua Score — a validated risk assessment model that determines risk of VTE and need for anticoagulation in hospitalized patients — a score of ≥4 points is considered high risk, with decreased mobility assigned 3 points and recent trauma or surgery 2 points. Thus, patients with extremity fractures requiring surgery or pelvic or acetabular fractures are considered high risk and require thromboprophylaxis.

Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), a drug that binds to and accelerates the activity of antithrombin III, is considered safe and effective for thromboprophylaxis. Although LMWH is associated with a low risk of bleeding, subcutaneous injections can be uncomfortable and leave local bruising, raising concerns about adherence, especially after surgery. Aspirin also has antithrombotic properties, (including reductions in thrombin and thromboxane A2, an important cofactor in platelet function) and has been shown to have similar efficacy as rivaroxaban in the prevention of VTE following total hip arthroplasty. Although clinical guidelines recommend LMWH for thromboprophylaxis after a fracture, patients may prefer aspirin given its lower cost and oral administration, but head-to-head comparisons are lacking.

To that end, the authors of the Prevention of Clot in Orthopaedic Trauma (PREVENT CLOT) trial compared the effectiveness and safety of thromboprophylaxis with aspirin or LMWH in patients with limb fracture or pelvic or acetabular fracture. They randomized 12,000 patients at 21 sites to receive enoxaparin (30 mg) or aspirin (81 mg) twice daily during hospitalization. Once discharged, thromboprophylaxis was continued according to local clinical protocols.

The primary outcome of death from any cause at 90 days was similar in the two groups: 47 patients (0.78%) in the aspirin group versus 45 patients (0.73%) in the LMWH group (P<0.001 for a noninferiority margin of 0.75 percentage points). Secondary outcomes, including incidence of nonfatal pulmonary embolism and serious bleeding, also did not differ significantly between the two groups, but patients who received aspirin had a higher incidence of DVT (2.51% vs. 1.71%). The authors concluded that thromboprophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to LMWH in patients with extremity fractures requiring surgery or pelvic or acetabular fractures.

The following caveats should be noted when interpreting these results: Patients with a history of VTE in the past 6 months, receiving therapeutic anticoagulation at the time of admission, or with a chronic blood-clotting disorder were excluded. Transfusion of ≥2 units of blood was required in 13% to 14% of patients in both groups. The average duration of therapy was 3 to 4 weeks, requiring many LMWH injections.

Nonetheless, the results of this trial suggest that offering aspirin for thromboprophylaxis can safely alleviate some of the burden of illness resulting from LMWH. We will have to wait and see if guidelines change to incorporate aspirin into thromboprophylaxis recommendations.

Preventing Venous Thromboembolism After Hip Replacement.


Aspirin is noninferior to low-molecular-weight heparin for extended VTE prophylaxis.

 

The risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) persists for several weeks after a major orthopedic procedure, leading to recommendations that anticoagulant therapy continue for up to 5 weeks postoperatively. Such prophylaxis can be accomplished by daily subcutaneous injections of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), but this adds to the discomfort and cost of the procedure.

To determine if aspirin might be a safe and effective substitute for LMWH in this setting, Canadian investigators conducted a multicenter, blinded, randomized, controlled trial involving 778 participants who underwent total hip arthroplasty. All patients initially received dalteparin LMWH (5000 U daily by subcutaneous injection) for 8 to 10 days postoperatively and then were randomized to continue dalteparin or receive aspirin (81 mg daily) for 28 more days.

During a 90 day follow-up period, VTE events occurred in 5 dalteparin recipients (1.3%) and in 1 aspirin recipient (0.3%), indicating that aspirin was noninferior (P<0.001) but not superior (P=0.22) to dalteparin. Major bleeding occurred in 1 dalteparin recipient and no aspirin recipients; clinically significant nonmajor bleeding events occurred in 4 dalteparin recipients and 2 aspirin recipients. A composite analysis of VTE and bleeding events favored aspirin (0.8% vs. 2.5%, P=0.09).

Comment: This investigation suggests that aspirin is as safe and effective as dalteparin LMWH. However, only 17.7% of screened patients participated in the trial, and very few events occurred, so the results might not be generalizable to the larger population of patients undergoing hip arthroplasty or other major orthopedic procedures. Nevertheless, future studies assessing new antithrombotic agents should include aspirin as a comparator.

 

Source: Journal Watch Oncology and Hematology