Abstract
Background Subcutaneous (SC) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH) are safe and efficacious for bridging anticoagulation after warfarin interruption. Although LMWH and UFH are self-administered by >90% of patients, factors that may be important to patients such as differences in pain and ecchymosis have not been explored. Methods We randomized 24 patients to receive SC LMWH or SC UFH twice-daily during the perioperative period. Injection associated pain was recorded using a visual analogue scale and area of ecchymosis was measured by digital photography of the injection site on the day of the procedure. Results The area of ecchymosis was 2-fold higher with UFH than LMWH (19.4 cm2 vs. 8.98 cm2; P = 0.33) and pain was similar with both treatments (115 mm vs. 171 mm; P = 0.25), though neither finding attained statistical significance. Conclusions This exploratory study was underpowered to detect differences between the groups. Further studies are needed to reliably compare pain and ecchymosis in LMWH vs. UFH.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Douketis JD (2002) Perioperative anticoagulation management in patients who are receiving oral anticoagulant therapy. Thromb Res 108:3–13. doi:10.1016/S0049-3848(02)00387-0
Douketis JD, Berger PB, Dunn AS, Jaffer AK, Spyropoulos AC, Becker RC, Ansell J (2008) Peroperative management of anticoagulant therapy: American College of chest physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (8th edition). Chest 133:299S–339S. doi:10.1378/chest.08-0675
Prandoni P, Carnovali M, Marchiori A (2004) Subcutaneous adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin vs fixed-dose low-molecular-weight heparin in the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism. Arch Intern Med 164:1077–1083. doi:10.1001/archinte.164.10.1077
Kearon C, Ginsberg JS, Julian JA, Douketis J, Solymoss S, Ockelford P, Jackson S, Turpie AG, MacKinnon B, Hirsch J, Gent M (2006) Comparison of fixed-dose weight-adjusted unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin for acute treatment of venous thrombosis. JAMA 296:935–942. doi:10.1001/jama.296.8.935
Spyropoulos AC, Turpie AG, Dunn AS, Spandorfer J, Douketis J, Jacobson A, Frost FJ, REGIMEN Investigators (2006) Clinical outcomes with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin as bridging therapy in patients on long-term oral anticoagulants: the REGIMEN registry. J Thromb Haemost 4:1246–1252. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01908.x
Douketis JD, Johnson JA, Turpie AG (2004) Low-molecular-weight heparin as bridging anticoagulation in patients who require temporary interruption of warfarin for an elective surgical or invasive procedure: assessment of a standardized peri-procedural anticoagulation regimen. Arch Intern Med 169:1319–1326. doi:10.1001/archinte.164.12.1319
Acknowledgments
We thank Ms. Ellen McDonald and Dr. Wendy Lim for their assistance in the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11239-009-0389-0
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jamula, E., Woods, K., Verhovsek, M. et al. Comparison of pain and ecchymosis with low-molecular-weight heparin vs. unfractionated heparin in patients requiring bridging anticoagulation after warfarin interruption: a randomized trial. J Thromb Thrombolysis 28, 266–268 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-009-0312-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-009-0312-8