Clinical outcomes following a hospital-wide transition from enoxaparin to tinzaparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in neurosurgical patients

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Acta Neurochirurgica Pub Date : 2026-09-25 Epub Date: 2026-09-28 DOI:10.1007/s00701-026-07027-7
Leonard Ritter, Adrian Liebert, Jens Weigel, Karl M. Schebesch, Thomas Eibl
{"title":"Clinical outcomes following a hospital-wide transition from enoxaparin to tinzaparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in neurosurgical patients","authors":"Leonard Ritter,&nbsp;Adrian Liebert,&nbsp;Jens Weigel,&nbsp;Karl M. Schebesch,&nbsp;Thomas Eibl","doi":"10.1007/s00701-026-07027-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is a key component of neurosurgical care, with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) representing the standard pharmacological approach. While enoxaparin is well established, the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of tinzaparin in neurosurgical patients remains limited. This study aimed to compare the incidence of VTE and postoperative rebleeding between enoxaparin and tinzaparin in a large cohort of neurosurgical patients.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Following a standardized institutional switch from enoxaparin to tinzaparin in 2021, we conducted a retrospective cohort study including all adult patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures during the 2.5-year periods before and after the change. Patients were stratified according to their perioperative VTE risk. The primary outcome was imaging-confirmed symptomatic VTE during hospitalization, and the secondary outcome was postoperative rebleeding requiring surgical evacuation. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 4,888 patients were included. Overall, 51 symptomatic VTE events occurred (1.04%). In low risk patients (Group A), VTE incidence did not differ significantly between enoxaparin and tinzaparin (0.44% vs. 0.86%, <i>p</i> = 0.35). In moderate-to-high risk patients (Group B), VTE occurred significantly more frequently with tinzaparin than enoxaparin (1.67% vs. 0.84%, <i>p</i> = 0.04), driven predominantly by PE (1.05% vs. 0.18%, <i>p</i> = 0.01), while DVT rates were comparable (0.62% vs. 0.67%, <i>p</i> = 0.87). Multivariable analysis in Group B confirmed lower odds of VTE with enoxaparin (OR 0.475, 95% CI 0.246–0.919, <i>p</i> = 0.027). Postoperative rebleeding rates did not differ significantly between treatment groups. The increase in PE coincided with increased CTA utilization and showed no clear temporal step change following the switch to tinzaparin.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Both enoxaparin and tinzaparin were associated with low VTE rates and comparable postoperative rebleeding rates. Although higher VTE rates with tinzaparin were observed in the medium-to-high risk group, the predominance of PE, increased CTA utilization, and absence of a temporal step change limit a causal interpretation. These findings should therefore be considered hypothesis-generating rather than evidence of superior efficacy of either agent.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7370,"journal":{"name":"Acta Neurochirurgica","volume":"168 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13619725/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Neurochirurgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00701-026-07027-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is a key component of neurosurgical care, with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) representing the standard pharmacological approach. While enoxaparin is well established, the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of tinzaparin in neurosurgical patients remains limited. This study aimed to compare the incidence of VTE and postoperative rebleeding between enoxaparin and tinzaparin in a large cohort of neurosurgical patients.

Methods

Following a standardized institutional switch from enoxaparin to tinzaparin in 2021, we conducted a retrospective cohort study including all adult patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures during the 2.5-year periods before and after the change. Patients were stratified according to their perioperative VTE risk. The primary outcome was imaging-confirmed symptomatic VTE during hospitalization, and the secondary outcome was postoperative rebleeding requiring surgical evacuation. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders.

Results

A total of 4,888 patients were included. Overall, 51 symptomatic VTE events occurred (1.04%). In low risk patients (Group A), VTE incidence did not differ significantly between enoxaparin and tinzaparin (0.44% vs. 0.86%, p = 0.35). In moderate-to-high risk patients (Group B), VTE occurred significantly more frequently with tinzaparin than enoxaparin (1.67% vs. 0.84%, p = 0.04), driven predominantly by PE (1.05% vs. 0.18%, p = 0.01), while DVT rates were comparable (0.62% vs. 0.67%, p = 0.87). Multivariable analysis in Group B confirmed lower odds of VTE with enoxaparin (OR 0.475, 95% CI 0.246–0.919, p = 0.027). Postoperative rebleeding rates did not differ significantly between treatment groups. The increase in PE coincided with increased CTA utilization and showed no clear temporal step change following the switch to tinzaparin.

Conclusion

Both enoxaparin and tinzaparin were associated with low VTE rates and comparable postoperative rebleeding rates. Although higher VTE rates with tinzaparin were observed in the medium-to-high risk group, the predominance of PE, increased CTA utilization, and absence of a temporal step change limit a causal interpretation. These findings should therefore be considered hypothesis-generating rather than evidence of superior efficacy of either agent.

在全院范围内从依诺肝素过渡到丁扎肝素预防神经外科患者静脉血栓栓塞的临床结果
目的:静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)预防是神经外科护理的关键组成部分,低分子肝素(LMWHs)代表了标准的药理学方法。虽然依诺肝素已经得到了很好的证实,但关于丁沙肝素在神经外科患者中的有效性和安全性的证据仍然有限。本研究旨在比较依诺肝素和丁扎肝素在一大群神经外科患者中静脉血栓栓塞和术后再出血的发生率。方法:在2021年从依诺肝素到丁沙肝素的标准化机构转换之后,我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究,包括所有在转换前后2.5年期间接受神经外科手术的成年患者。根据围手术期静脉血栓栓塞风险对患者进行分层。主要结局是住院期间影像学证实的症状性静脉血栓栓塞,次要结局是术后再出血需要手术疏散。进行多变量逻辑回归分析以调整潜在的混杂因素。结果:共纳入4888例患者。总共发生51例症状性静脉血栓栓塞事件(1.04%)。在低危患者(A组)中,静脉血栓栓塞发生率依诺肝素与丁扎肝素之间无显著差异(0.44% vs 0.86%, p = 0.35)。在中至高危患者(B组)中,丁沙肝素组静脉血栓栓塞发生率明显高于依诺肝素组(1.67%比0.84%,p = 0.04),主要由PE引起(1.05%比0.18%,p = 0.01),而DVT发生率相当(0.62%比0.67%,p = 0.87)。B组多变量分析证实依诺肝素组静脉血栓栓塞的发生率较低(OR 0.475, 95% CI 0.246 ~ 0.919, p = 0.027)。两组术后再出血率无显著差异。PE的增加与CTA利用率的增加相一致,并且在切换到丁沙肝素后没有明显的时间阶跃变化。结论:依诺肝素和丁沙肝素均可降低静脉血栓栓塞率和术后再出血率。虽然在中高风险组中观察到丁沙肝素较高的静脉血栓栓塞率,但PE的优势,CTA利用率的增加,以及缺乏时间阶跃变化限制了因果解释。因此,这些发现应该被认为是假设产生,而不是任何一种药物疗效优越的证据。
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
Acta Neurochirurgica
Acta Neurochirurgica 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
342
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The journal "Acta Neurochirurgica" publishes only original papers useful both to research and clinical work. Papers should deal with clinical neurosurgery - diagnosis and diagnostic techniques, operative surgery and results, postoperative treatment - or with research work in neuroscience if the underlying questions or the results are of neurosurgical interest. Reports on congresses are given in brief accounts. As official organ of the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies the journal publishes all announcements of the E.A.N.S. and reports on the activities of its member societies. Only contributions written in English will be accepted.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书