Dataset Information

The effectiveness and safety of LMWH for preventing thrombosis in patients with spinal cord injury: a meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) are commonly used for preventing venous thrombosis of the lower extremity in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury. Although, LMWH is the most commonly used drug, it has yet to be established whether it is more effective and safer than UFH. Further, a comparison of the effectiveness of LMWH in preventing thrombosis at different locations and different degrees of spinal cord injury has also not been clearly defined.

Materials and methods

Cohort studies comparing the use of LMWH and UFH in the prevention of lower limb venous thrombosis in patients with spinal cord injury were identified using PubMed. The risk of bias and clinical relevance of the included studies were assessed using forest plots. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. The main results of the study were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3.

Results

A total of five studies were included in this meta-analysis. Four studies compared the effectiveness and safety of LMWH and UFH in preventing thrombosis in patients with spinal cord injury. No significant differences were found between the therapeutic effects of the two drugs, and the summary RR was 1.33 (95% CI 0.42-4.16; P = 0.63). There was also no significant difference in the risk of bleeding between the two medications, and the aggregate RR was 0.78 (95% CI 0.55-1.12; P = 0.18). When comparing the efficacy of LMWH in preventing thrombosis in different segments and different degrees of spinal cord injury, no significant differences were found.

Conclusions

The results of this analysis show that compared with UFH, LMWH has no obvious advantages in efficacy nor risk prevention, and there is no evident difference in the prevention of thrombosis for patients with injuries at different spinal cord segments.

SUBMITTER: Lin Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8048068 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVarious pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches have been applied to reduce sublesional bone loss after spinal cord injury (SCI), and the results are inconsistent across the studies. The objective of this meta-analysis was to investigate whether the two most-studied interventions, bisphosphonate analogues and functional electrical stimulation (FES), could effectively decrease bone mineral density (BMD) attenuation and/or restore lost BMD in the SCI population.MethodsRandomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and prospective follow-up studies employing bisphosphonates or FES to treat post-SCI osteoporosis were identified in PubMed and Scopus. The primary outcome was the percentage of BMD change from baseline measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) or computed tomography (CT). Data were extracted from four points: the 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 18th month after intervention.ResultsA total of 19 studies were included in the analysis and involved 364 patients and 14 healthy individuals. Acute SCI participants treated with bisphosphonate therapy demonstrated a trend toward less bone loss than participants who received placebos or usual care. A significant difference in BMD decline was noted between both groups at the 3rd and 12th month post-medication. The subgroup analysis failed to show the superiority of intravenous bisphosphonate over oral administration. Regarding FES training, chronic SCI patients had 5.96% (95% CI, 2.08% to 9.84%), 7.21% (95%CI, 1.79% to 12.62%), and 9.56% (95% CI, 2.86% to 16.26%) increases in BMD at the 3rd, 6th, and 12th months post-treatment, respectively. The studies employing FES ? 5 days per week were likely to have better effectiveness than studies using FES ? 3 days per week.ConclusionsOur meta-analysis indicated bisphosphonate administration early following SCI effectively attenuated sublesional bone loss. FES intervention for chronic SCI patients could significantly increase sublesional BMD near the site of maximal mechanical loading.

Project description:Human intestinal flora comprises thousands of bacterial species. Growth and composition of intestinal microbiota is dependent on various parameters, including immune mechanisms, dietary factors and intestinal motility. Patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) frequently display neurogenic bowel dysfunction due to the absence of central nervous system control over the gastrointestinal system. Considering the bowel dysfunction and altered colonic transit time in patients with SCI, we hypothesized the presence of a significant change in the composition of their gut microbiome. The objective of this study was to characterize the gut microbiota in adult SCI patients with different types of bowel dysfunction. We tested our hypothesis on 30 SCI patients (15 upper motor neuron [UMN] bowel syndrome, 15 lower motor neuron [LMN] bowel syndrome) and 10 healthy controls using the 16S rRNA sequencing. Gut microbial patterns were sampled from feces. Independent of study groups, gut microbiota of the participants were dominated by Blautia, Bifidobacterium, Faecalibacterium and Ruminococcus. When we compared all study groups, Roseburia, Pseudobutyrivibrio, Dialister, Marvinbryantia and Megamonas appeared as the genera that were statistically different between groups. In comparison to the healthy group, total bacterial counts of Pseudobutyrivibrio, Dialister and Megamonas genera were significantly lower in UMN bowel dysfunction group. The total bacterial count of Marvinbryantia genus was significantly lower in UMN bowel dysfunction group when compared to the LMN group. Total bacterial counts of Roseburia, Pseudobutyrivibrio and Megamonas genera were significantly lower in LMN bowel dysfunction group when compared to healthy groups. Our results demonstrate for the first time that butyrate-producing members are specifically reduced in SCI patients when compared to healthy subjects. The results of this study would be of interest since to our knowledge, microbiome-associated studies targeting SCI patients are non-existent and the results might help explain possible implications of gut microbiome in SCI.