|
Home
|
Issues
|
MJA shop
|
MJA Careers
|
Contact
|
Topics
|
Search
|
RSS |
→ Contents list for this issue
→ More articles on Vascular surgery
→ More articles on Haematology
→ More articles on General medicine
→ Search PubMed for related articles
Click to Login
Hide the Login Box
→ Click here for subscription options
To the Editor: In the 3 November 2008 issue of the Journal, Millar recommends against routine thromboprophylaxis in medical patients.1
The evidence base for clinical decision making regarding thromboprophylaxis in medical patients remains limited. Although its overall benefit may be low, the absolute benefit to the community is significant. As up to 40% of cases of venous thromboembolism (VTE) occur in patients recently hospitalised for medical illness,2-3 there is a significant burden of disease that justifies prophylaxis in patients at high risk of VTE.
The challenge is to identify medical patients at greatest risk of VTE, and to provide appropriate pharmacological prophylaxis, but to avoid using prophylaxis in patients at lower risk of VTE.
Millar states that aspirin is as effective as heparin, with reference to the Pulmonary Embolism Prevention (PEP) trial.4 However, the PEP trial compared aspirin with placebo, and many participants also received heparin — it did not compare aspirin with heparin. Participants were undergoing surgery for hip fracture, and none were medical patients.
A reduction in the endpoint of fatal pulmonary embolus (PE) is difficult to demonstrate in trials where imaging is used to detect disease at an early stage. This prompts treatment of asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis and modifies the natural history, leading to low reported PE rates.
Rather than recommend for or against routine thromboprophylaxis in medical patients, we advise that patients should have a VTE risk assessment and that appropriate prophylaxis should be given according to evidence-based guidelines such as those of the American College of Chest Physicians5 and the International Consensus Statement6 (which we have attempted to summarise and condense into a practical, pocket-sized booklet7).
Competing interests: All authors are members of the Australia and Zealand Working Party on the Management and Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism. John Fletcher has received speaker fees and travel assistance from Sanofi-Aventis and GlaxoSmithKline, and a speaker fee from Bayer Schering Pharma. Donald MacLellan has received non-directed educational grants from a number of pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical companies, including Sanofi-Aventis, to allay costs in the production of the Prevention of venous thromboembolism booklets. Harry Gibbs has received clinical trial funding, consultancy fees, honoraria and travel grants from a number of pharmaceutical and medical device companies, including Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer and Boehringer Ingelheim. Geoff Matthews received travel assistance from Sanofi-Aventis.
1 Western Clinical School, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, NSW.
3 Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD.
4 Austin and Repatriation Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC.
johnfATmed.usyd.edu.au
|
Home
|
Issues
|
MJA shop
| Terms of use
|
MJA Careers
|
More...
|
Contact
|
Topics
|
Search
|
RSS |
©The Medical Journal of Australia 2009 www.mja.com.au PRINT ISSN: 0025-729X ONLINE ISSN: 1326-5377