Impact of Heparin and Enoxaparin Anticoagulant Prophylaxis on Improving Acute Mortality in Burn Patients.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Manav M Patel, Shawn E Lim, Victoria A Cuello, Joshua E Lewis, Amina El Ayadi, Michael J Erickson, Steven E Wolf, Juquan Song
{"title":"Impact of Heparin and Enoxaparin Anticoagulant Prophylaxis on Improving Acute Mortality in Burn Patients.","authors":"Manav M Patel, Shawn E Lim, Victoria A Cuello, Joshua E Lewis, Amina El Ayadi, Michael J Erickson, Steven E Wolf, Juquan Song","doi":"10.1093/jbcr/iraf080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Burn patients have a higher chance of developing thromboembolic complications leading to worsened mortality rates so prophylactic anticoagulation is important. Anticoagulants such as enoxaparin, a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), and unfractionated heparin (UFH) have been frequently used as chemical prophylactic treatments of thromboembolisms. Enoxaparin has been shown to have lower mortality and higher efficacy in surgical patients and coronary artery disease patients. The aim of the study is to assess mortality and compare the safety of enoxaparin and heparin in acute burn patients. A retrospective cohort study of 26572 burn patients was conducted using the TriNetX database. Patients were divided into two cohorts: those receiving only unfractionated heparin (Cohort 1) and those receiving only enoxaparin (Cohort 2) prophylaxis within 24 hours after burn injury. Cohorts were matched with 1:1 propensity score matching to correct for differences in age, gender, ethnicity, race, burn severity, inhalation injury, diabetes mellitus, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and central line venous catheter placement. Outcomes assessed included mortality and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) within a month (30 days). After matching, the enoxaparin(n=7484) cohort showed significantly lower 30-day mortality (1.3%) compared to the UFH (n=7484) cohort (3.6%) (RR = 2.70, 95% CI: 2.15-3.40, p < 0.05). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a higher survival probability in the enoxaparin group (98.6% vs. 96.4%, p < 0.05). DVT risk was slightly higher with UFH but not statistically significant (RR = 1.18, 95% CI: 0.54-2.54, p = 0.68). Prophylactic anticoagulation with enoxaparin is associated with a significant lower 30-day mortality risk compared to unfractionated heparin.</p>","PeriodicalId":15205,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Burn Care & Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Burn Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/iraf080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Burn patients have a higher chance of developing thromboembolic complications leading to worsened mortality rates so prophylactic anticoagulation is important. Anticoagulants such as enoxaparin, a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), and unfractionated heparin (UFH) have been frequently used as chemical prophylactic treatments of thromboembolisms. Enoxaparin has been shown to have lower mortality and higher efficacy in surgical patients and coronary artery disease patients. The aim of the study is to assess mortality and compare the safety of enoxaparin and heparin in acute burn patients. A retrospective cohort study of 26572 burn patients was conducted using the TriNetX database. Patients were divided into two cohorts: those receiving only unfractionated heparin (Cohort 1) and those receiving only enoxaparin (Cohort 2) prophylaxis within 24 hours after burn injury. Cohorts were matched with 1:1 propensity score matching to correct for differences in age, gender, ethnicity, race, burn severity, inhalation injury, diabetes mellitus, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and central line venous catheter placement. Outcomes assessed included mortality and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) within a month (30 days). After matching, the enoxaparin(n=7484) cohort showed significantly lower 30-day mortality (1.3%) compared to the UFH (n=7484) cohort (3.6%) (RR = 2.70, 95% CI: 2.15-3.40, p < 0.05). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a higher survival probability in the enoxaparin group (98.6% vs. 96.4%, p < 0.05). DVT risk was slightly higher with UFH but not statistically significant (RR = 1.18, 95% CI: 0.54-2.54, p = 0.68). Prophylactic anticoagulation with enoxaparin is associated with a significant lower 30-day mortality risk compared to unfractionated heparin.

肝素和依诺肝素抗凝预防对改善烧伤患者急性死亡率的影响。
烧伤患者有更高的机会发展血栓栓塞并发症,导致死亡率恶化,因此预防性抗凝是重要的。抗凝剂,如依诺肝素,低分子量肝素(LMWH)和未分离肝素(UFH)已经常被用作化学预防性治疗血栓栓塞。依诺肝素已被证明对外科病人和冠心病病人有较低的死亡率和较高的疗效。该研究的目的是评估急性烧伤患者的死亡率并比较依诺肝素和肝素的安全性。使用TriNetX数据库对26572例烧伤患者进行回顾性队列研究。患者被分为两组:烧伤后24小时内仅接受未分离肝素治疗的患者(队列1)和仅接受依诺肝素预防治疗的患者(队列2)。以1:1的倾向评分对队列进行匹配,以纠正年龄、性别、种族、种族、烧伤严重程度、吸入性损伤、糖尿病、急性心肌梗死、中风和中心静脉置管的差异。评估的结果包括一个月内(30天)的死亡率和深静脉血栓形成(DVT)。配对后,依诺肝素组(n=7484) 30天死亡率(1.3%)显著低于UFH组(n=7484) (3.6%) (RR = 2.70, 95% CI: 2.15 ~ 3.40, p < 0.05)。Kaplan-Meier分析显示依诺肝素组患者生存率更高(98.6%比96.4%,p < 0.05)。UFH患者DVT风险略高,但无统计学意义(RR = 1.18, 95% CI: 0.54 ~ 2.54, p = 0.68)。与未分离肝素相比,应用依诺肝素预防性抗凝可显著降低30天死亡风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
21.40%
发文量
535
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Burn Care & Research provides the latest information on advances in burn prevention, research, education, delivery of acute care, and research to all members of the burn care team. As the official publication of the American Burn Association, this is the only U.S. journal devoted exclusively to the treatment and research of patients with burns. Original, peer-reviewed articles present the latest information on surgical procedures, acute care, reconstruction, burn prevention, and research and education. Other topics include physical therapy/occupational therapy, nutrition, current events in the evolving healthcare debate, and reports on the newest computer software for diagnostics and treatment. The Journal serves all burn care specialists, from physicians, nurses, and physical and occupational therapists to psychologists, counselors, and researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信