uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Benefit-to-harm ratio of thromboprophylaxis for patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Vascular Surgery.
2014 (English)In: Thrombosis and Haemostasis, ISSN 0340-6245, Vol. 111, no 2, 199-212 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Surgeons consider the benefit-to-harm ratio when making decisions regarding the use of anticoagulant venous thromboembolism (VIE) prophylaxis. We evaluated the benefit-to-harm ratio of the use of newer anticoagulants as thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery using the likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH), and assessed the effects of variation in the definition of major bleeding on the results. A systematic literature search was performed to identify phase II and phase III studies that compared regulatory authority-approved newer anticoagulants to the low-molecular-weight heparin enoxaparin in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. Analysis of outcomes data estimated the clinical benefit (number-needed-to-treat [NNT] to prevent one symptomatic VIE) and clinical harm (number-needed-to-harm [NNH] or the NNT to cause one major bleeding event) of therapies. We estimated each trial's benefit, to-harm ratio from NNT and NNH values, and expressed this as LHH = (1/NNT)/(1/NNH) = NNH/NNT, Based on reporting of efficacy and safety outcomes, most studies favoured enoxaparin over fondaparinux, and rivaroxaban over enoxaparin. However, when using the LHH metric, most trials favoured enoxaparin over both fondaparinux and rivaroxaban when they included surgical-site bleeding that did not require reoperation in the definition of major bleeding. The exclusion of bleeding at surgical site which did not require reoperation shifted the benefit-to-harm ratio in favour of the newer agents. Variations in the definitions of major bleeding may change the benefit-to-harm ratio and subsequently affect its interpretation. Clinical trials should attempt to improve the consistency of major bleeding reporting.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 111, no 2, 199-212 p.
Keyword [en]
Major orthopaedic surgery, thromboprophylaxis, enoxaparin, the likelihood of being helped or harmed, benefit-to-harm ratio
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-220295DOI: 10.1160/TH13-08-0654ISI: 000330750500002OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-220295DiVA: diva2:705711
Available from: 2014-03-17 Created: 2014-03-12 Last updated: 2014-03-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bergqvist, David
By organisation
Vascular Surgery
In the same journal
Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 219 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link