Thrombosis prophylaxis following trauma

Abstract

Purpose of review This review explores the persistent occurrence of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) in major trauma patients despite standard thrombosis prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH). It investigates the inadequacies of standard pharmacologic prophylaxis and proposes alternative approaches not covered in current trauma guidelines. Recent findings Recent studies highlight the effectiveness of monitoring and adjusting subcutaneous LMWH doses based on anti-Xa levels for the purpose of reducing VTE in trauma patients. The need for dose adaptation arises due to factors like fluctuating organ function, varying antithrombin levels, interaction with plasma proteins, and altered bioavailability influenced by oedema or vasopressor use. Additionally, promising alternatives such as intravenous LMWH, UFH, and argatroban have shown success in intensive care settings. Summary The standard dosing of subcutaneous LMWH is often insufficient for effective thrombosis prophylaxis in trauma patients. A more personalised approach, adjusting doses based on specific effect levels like anti-Xa or choosing an alternative mode of anticoagulation, could reduce the risk of insufficient prophylaxis and subsequent VTE.