Aspirin or Rivaroxaban for VTE Prophylaxis after Hip or Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials and meta-analyses have suggested that aspirin may be effective for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (proximal deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) after total hip or total knee arthroplasty, but comparisons with direct oral anticoagulants are lacking for prophylaxis beyond hospital discharge. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving patients who were undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty. All the patients received once-daily oral rivaroxaban (10 mg) until postoperative day 5 and then were randomly assigned to continue rivaroxaban or switch to aspirin (81 mg daily) for an additional 9 days after total knee arthroplasty or for 30 days after total hip arthroplasty. Patients were followed for 90 days for symptomatic venous thromboembolism (the primary effectiveness outcome) and bleeding complications, including major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (the primary safety outcome). RESULTS: A total of 3424 patients (1804 undergoing total hip arthroplasty and 1620 undergoing total knee arthroplasty) were enrolled in the trial. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 11 of 1707 patients (0.64%) in the aspirin group and in 12 of 1717 patients (0.70%) in the rivaroxaban group (difference, 0.06 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.55 to 0.66; P<0.001 for noninferiority and P=0.84 for superiority). Major bleeding complications occurred in 8 patients (0.47%) in the aspirin group and in 5 (0.29%) in the rivaroxaban group (difference, 0.18 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.65 to 0.29; P=0.42). Clinically important bleeding occurred in 22 patients (1.29%) in the aspirin group and in 17 (0.99%) in the rivaroxaban group (difference, 0.30 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.07 to 0.47; P=0.43). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who received 5 days of rivaroxaban prophylaxis after total hip or total knee arthroplasty, extended prophylaxis with aspirin was not significantly different from rivaroxaban in the prevention of symptomatic venous thromboembolism. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01720108 .).

Aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin for extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of aspirin in thromboprophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is controversial. OBJECTIVE: To compare extended prophylaxis with aspirin and dalteparin for prevention of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) after THA. DESIGN: Multicenter randomized, controlled trial with a noninferiority design based on a minimal clinically important difference of 2.0%. Randomization was electronically generated; patients were assigned to a treatment group through a Web-based program. Patients, physicians, study coordinators, health care team members, outcome adjudicators, and data analysts were blinded to interventions. (Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN11902170). SETTING: 12 tertiary care orthopedic referral centers in Canada. PATIENTS: 778 patients who had elective unilateral THA between 2007 and 2010. INTERVENTION: After an initial 10 days of dalteparin prophylaxis after elective THA, patients were randomly assigned to 28 days of dalteparin (n = 400) or aspirin (n = 386). MEASUREMENTS: Symptomatic VTE confirmed by objective testing (primary efficacy outcome) and bleeding. RESULTS: Five of 398 patients (1.3%) randomly assigned to dalteparin and 1 of 380 (0.3%) randomly assigned to aspirin had VTE (absolute difference, 1.0 percentage point [95% CI, -0.5 to 2.5 percentage points]). Aspirin was noninferior (P < 0.001) but not superior (P = 0.22) to dalteparin. Clinically significant bleeding occurred in 5 patients (1.3%) receiving dalteparin and 2 (0.5%) receiving aspirin. The absolute between-group difference in a composite of all VTE and clinically significant bleeding events was 1.7 percentage points (CI, -0.3 to 3.8 percentage points; P = 0.091) in favor of aspirin. LIMITATION: The study was halted prematurely because of difficulty with patient recruitment. CONCLUSION: Extended prophylaxis for 28 days with aspirin was noninferior to and as safe as dalteparin for the prevention of VTE after THA in patients who initially received dalteparin for 10 days. Given its low cost and greater convenience, aspirin may be considered a reasonable alternative for extended thromboprophylaxis after THA. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Computed tomographic pulmonary angiography vs ventilation-perfusion lung scanning in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Ventilation-perfusion (V(dot)Q(dot) lung scanning and computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) are widely used imaging procedures for the evaluation of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ventilation-perfusion scanning has been largely replaced by CTPA in many centers despite limited comparative formal evaluations and concerns about CTPA's low sensitivity (ie, chance of missing clinically important pulmonary embuli). OBJECTIVES: To determine whether CTPA may be relied upon as a safe alternative to V(dot)Q(dot scanning as the initial pulmonary imaging procedure for excluding the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in acutely symptomatic patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, single-blinded noninferiority clinical trial performed at 4 Canadian and 1 US tertiary care centers between May 2001 and April 2005 and involving 1417 patients considered likely to have acute pulmonary embolism based on a Wells clinical model score of 4.5 or greater or a positive D-dimer assay result. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to undergo either V(dot)Q(dot scanning or CTPA. Patients in whom pulmonary embolism was considered excluded did not receive antithrombotic therapy and were followed up for a 3-month period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was the subsequent development of symptomatic pulmonary embolism or proximal deep vein thrombosis in patients in whom pulmonary embolism had initially been excluded. RESULTS: Seven hundred one patients were randomized to CTPA and 716 to V(dot)Q(dot scanning. Of these, 133 patients (19.2%) in the CTPA group vs 101 (14.2%) in the V(dot)Q(dot scan group were diagnosed as having pulmonary embolism in the initial evaluation period (difference, 5.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1% to 8.9%) and were treated with anticoagulant therapy. Of those in whom pulmonary embolism was considered excluded, 2 of 561 patients (0.4%) randomized to CTPA vs 6 of 611 patients (1.0%) undergoing V(dot)Q(dot scanning developed venous thromboembolism in follow-up (difference, -0.6%; 95% CI, -1.6% to 0.3%) including one patient with fatal pulmonary embolism in the V(dot)Q(dot group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, CTPA was not inferior to V(dot)Q(dot scanning in ruling out pulmonary embolism. However, significantly more patients were diagnosed with pulmonary embolism using the CTPA approach. Further research is required to determine whether all pulmonary emboli detected by CTPA should be managed with anticoagulant therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN65486961.

Use of spiral computed tomography contrast angiography and ultrasonography to exclude the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department.

Spiral computed tomography (CT) contrast angiography is a promising imaging modality for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism but the negative predictive value of this test remains controversial. We performed a multi-center prospective cohort study to determine the safety of relying on a negative spiral CT contrast angiography scan to exclude pulmonary embolism. Patients presenting to the Emergency Departments of three tertiary care institutions with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism were potentially eligible for the study. Patients underwent a clinical evaluation to categorize pretest probability into low, moderate, and high categories, and had D-dimer testing performed. Patients at low pretest probability with normal D-dimer were considered to have pulmonary embolism excluded. The remaining patients underwent spiral CT contrast angiography scan of the pulmonary arterial circulation and bilateral venous ultrasound of the proximal leg veins. Patients who were confirmed to have pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis were treated with anticoagulant therapy. Patients in whom the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism was excluded did not receive anticoagulant therapy and were followed for a 3-month period for the development of venous thromboembolic complications. Eight hundred fifty-eight (858) patients were enrolled in this study. Three-hundred sixty-nine (369) patients had low pretest probability and negative D-dimer results and no further diagnostic tests were performed. None of these patients subsequently developed venous thromboembolic complications (0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0% to 1.0%). The remaining 489 were referred for spiral CT contrast angiography scan and ultrasound. Sixty-seven patients were confirmed to have pulmonary embolism and an additional 15 patients with negative CT scans had proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) on ultrasound for a total prevalence of venous thromboembolism of 82/489 (16.8%). Two of 409 patients who had pulmonary embolism excluded in the initial evaluation phase developed proximal venous thromboembolism (0.5%; 95% CI 0% to 1.8%) in the 3-month follow-up period. These findings suggest that the combination of a negative spiral CT contrast angiography scan and normal venous ultrasound imaging safely excludes the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the Emergency Department setting.