This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Further opinion Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Goel, D. P. Articles by Gray, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Goel, D. P. Articles by Gray, R.

Prophylaxis of deep-vein thrombosis in fractures below the knee

A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL

¹ Department of Orthopaedics, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta T2N 4N1, Canada.
² Department of Orthopaedics
³ 1015 Regent Street, Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B 6H5, Canada.
⁴ Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rockyview General Hospital, 7007-14 Street SW, Calgary, Alberta T2V 1P9, Canada.
⁵ Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Foothills Hospital, 1403 29th Street NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 2T9, Canada.

Correspondence should be sent to Mr R. Buckley; e-mail: buckclin{at}ucalgary.ca

The incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and the need for thromboprophylaxis following isolated trauma below the knee is uncertain. We have investigated this with a prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial using low molecular weight heparin with saline injection as placebo in patients aged between 18 and 75 years who had sustained an isolated fracture below the knee which required operative fixation. All patients had surgery within 48 hours of injury and were randomised to receive either the placebo or low molecular weight heparin for 14 days, after which they underwent bilateral lower limb venography, interpreted by three independent radiologists. Further follow-up was undertaken at two, six, eight and 12 weeks.

A total of 238 patients fulfilled all the inclusion criteria, with 127 in the low molecular weight heparin group and 111 in the placebo group, all of whom underwent bilateral venography. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis between those patients treated with low molecular weight heparin or the placebo (p = 0.22). The number of deep-vein thromboses in the two groups was 11 (8.7%) and 14 (12.6%), respectively. Age and the type of fracture were significantly associated with the rate of deep-vein thrombosis (p = 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively) but gender, comorbidities and the body mass index were not.

The overall incidence of deep-vein thrombosis in this series was 11%. There was no clinical or statistical significant reduction in the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis with the use of thromboprophylaxis. However, we accept that owing to a cessation of funding, recruitment to this trial had to be ended prior to establishing the necessary sample size. Our results cannot, therefore, categorically exclude the possibility that low molecular weight heparin treatment could be beneficial. We recommend a further multicentre trial be undertaken to resolve this matter.