Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in the treatment of thrombosis

Thromboembolic complications are a common and costly medical problem, associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in postoperative patients. There have been reports of death due to thromboembolic complications even after short procedures, e.g. arthroscopy. Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) (e.g., certoparin, dalteparin, enoxaparin, nadroparin, reviparin, tinzaparin) have been tested for treatment of deep vein thrombosis in comparison to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in many patients being effective and safe alternative for treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Fixed-dose subcutaneous LMWH once daily is in most cases of equivalent efficacy and safety compared to conventional UFH therapy. There may be less risk for bleeding, less platelet activation together with a control of markers of haemostatic system activation, and either no progression or regression of thrombus size in patients treated with LMWH. The handling of LMWH is more comfortable for patients and less time consuming for nurses and laboratories compared to UFH. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that LMWH are more cost effective than UFH. It has been calculated that outpatient treatment with LMWH may save 1641 dollars per patient in comparison to hospital treatment. This economic benefit of outpatient treatment of DVT seems to be realized in different health systems. Women with antiphospholipid antibodies and a history of either prior thrombotic events or pregnancy loss are at high risk during pregnancy for either another fetal death or thrombosis and may benefit from treatment with LMWH. In patients with malignant tumors secondary prophylaxis or long-term treatment with LMWH is successful. Patients with a contraindication for oral anticoagulants may benefit from treatment with LMWH as do patients on chronic anticoagulation treatment scheduled for an operative intervention. In most instances LMWH (dalteparin, enoxaparin, nadroparin) treatment for DVT may be given once daily at a fixed dose without any harm, based on a prolonged antithrombin activity. Effectiveness and safety of LMWH (dalteparin, enoxaparin, nadroparin, tinzaparin) in comparison to UFH treatment on outpatient basis has been demonstrated in several studies. In summary, LMWHs have an established role in the treatment of DVT and pulmonary embolism (PE), on an in- and outpatient basis and could realize substantial savings. Most studies were performed with dalteparin, enoxaparin and nadroparin. There is evidence that LMWHs may help to prolong survival in cancer patients and to avoid complications of the acute coronary syndrome.     

低分子肝素与普通肝素治疗急性肺血栓栓塞症疗效和安全性比较的Meta分析

目的根据现有随机对照临床研究,综合评价低分子肝素(LMWH)和普通肝素(UFH)作为初始治疗方案对非大面积肺血栓栓塞症(PTE)的有效性和安全性.方法从1966年1月～2003年8月MEDLINE光盘数据库和1978年1月～2003年8月中国生物医学文献光盘数据库(CBM-Disk)中,检索以非大面积PTE为研究对象,比较LMWH和UFH作为初始抗凝药物治疗效果和安全性的随机对照试验(RCT)文献,并对RCT结果进行Meta分析.结果共5项RCT 999例患者入选.与UFH抗凝治疗比较,LMWH治疗PTE的合并比数比(OR)结果如下:(1)病死率比较:合并OR为0.81,95%可信区间为0.36～1.81,OR合并假设检验,χ2合并=0.52,P＞0.05;(2)静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE)复发率比较:1项研究显示LMWH组TE复发率差异低于UFH组,合并OR为0.37,95%可信区间为0.14～1.00,OR合并假设检验,χ2合并=1.95,P=0.05;(3)严重出血率比较:合并OR为0.47,95%可信区间为0.16～1.39,OR合并假设检验,χ2合并=1.37,P＞0.05;(4)肝素诱导的血小板减少症(HIT)发生率比较:1项研究显示LMWH组HIT发生率显著低于UFH组,合并OR为0.66,95%可信区间为0.06～6.92,OR合并假设检验,χ2合并=0.35,P＞0.05.结论与UFH抗凝治疗比较,LMWH治疗非大面积PTE病死率无差异;部分研究提示UFH组(VTE)复发率显著高于LMWH组,但合并效应量显示无差异;LMWH的严重出血率与UFH亦无显著差异;部分研究提示HIT的发生率UFH组显著高于LMWH组,但合并效应量显示无差异.就总体而言,LMWH治疗非大面积PTE的疗效与安全性至少与UFH相当.     

Thromboprophylaxis and early antithrombotic therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke and cerebral venous and sinus thrombosis

So far, neither treatment with standard unfractionated heparin (UFH) nor with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has been shown to reduce mortality or to improve neurological outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Although a reduction of early recurrent stroke has been demonstrated for the use of subcutaneous UFH, this benefit was offset by a similar-sized increase in hemorrhagic stroke. Double-blinded studies of LMWH have demonstrated no difference between active treatment and placebo suggesting that LMWH is not effective for the early secondary prevention of ischemic stroke. Although UFH and LMWH may be beneficial in certain subgroups of stroke who are at high risk for early stroke recurrence, these subgroups are still to be defined. Currently, low-dose UFH and LMWH can only be recommended for prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis in patients with acute ischemic stroke with impaired mobility or other factors determining a particular high risk of venous thromboembolism. Available treatment data from controlled trials favor the use of anticoagulation as the first-line therapy for patients with cerebral venous and sinus thrombosis because it may reduce the risk of a fatal outcome and severe disability and does not promote intracranial hemorrhage.     

The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Although it is widely recommended that clinical trials undergo some type of quality review, the number and variety of quality assessment scales that exist make it unclear how to achieve the best assessment. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the type of quality assessment scale used affects the conclusions of meta-analytic studies. DESIGN AND SETTING: Meta-analysis of 17 trials comparing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) with standard heparin for prevention of postoperative thrombosis using 25 different scales to identify high-quality trials. The association between treatment effect and summary scores and the association with 3 key domains (concealment of treatment allocation, blinding of outcome assessment, and handling of withdrawals) were examined in regression models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pooled relative risks of deep vein thrombosis with LMWH vs standard heparin in high-quality vs low-quality trials as determined by 25 quality scales. RESULTS: Pooled relative risks from high-quality trials ranged from 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.90) to 0.90 (95% CI, 0.67-1.21) vs 0.52 (95% CI, 0.24-1.09) to 1.13 (95% CI, 0.70-1.82) for low-quality trials. For 6 scales, relative risks of high-quality trials were close to unity, indicating that LMWH was not significantly superior to standard heparin, whereas low-quality trials showed better protection with LMWH (P<.05). Seven scales showed the opposite: high quality trials showed an effect whereas low quality trials did not. For the remaining 12 scales, effect estimates were similar in the 2 quality strata. In regression analysis, summary quality scores were not significantly associated with treatment effects. There was no significant association of treatment effects with allocation concealment and handling of withdrawals. Open outcome assessment, however, influenced effect size with the effect of LMWH, on average, being exaggerated by 35% (95% CI, 1%-57%; P= .046). CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the use of summary scores to identify trials of high quality is problematic. Relevant methodological aspects should be assessed individually and their influence on effect sizes explored.     

肝素诱导的血小板减少症的临床观察

目的 分析静脉血栓栓塞症肝素诱导的血小板减少症及其治疗.方法 对我院2006年5月至2008年5月临床确诊并以肝素抗凝治疗的静脉血栓栓塞症患者202例进行临床分析,定期监测血常规.结果 其中有6例患者发生肝素诱导的血小板减少症,在应用肝素第3～9天出现血小板数目下降,发生率为2.97%,其下降率为60.4%～82.2%.对需要继续抗凝的4例患者停用肝素后改为阿加曲班继续治疗,第3～7天血小板数目回升至入院时水平.结论 在使用肝素进行抗凝治疗期间,应常规监测血小板数目变化,如发现血小板数目进行性下降大于50%,应及时停用肝素,需继续抗凝的患者可改用阿加曲班治疗.     

溃疡性结肠炎合并多发栓塞一例及文献复习

目的提高临床医师对溃疡性结肠炎合并静脉血栓栓塞症（VTE）的诊疗水平。方法对1例溃疡性结肠炎合并多发血栓栓塞病例的临床表现、实验室检查、影像学特征、治疗策略、药物选择、预后转归等方面进行病例分析及文献复习。结果溃疡性结肠炎合并多发栓塞患者因不正规治疗导致肺血栓栓塞（PTE）复发,除发生下肢深静脉血栓形成外,还发现肠系膜上静脉栓塞（MVT）,肝素（UFH）、低分子肝素（LMWH）治疗出血风险低,而华法林治疗出血风险大。结论炎症性肠病（IBD）与VTE关系密切,但症状不典型,易漏诊和误诊,IBD患者发生＂来源不明＂的肺栓塞,需注意排查肠系膜静脉栓塞（MVT）。IBD合并VTE治疗有出血风险,需根据其严重程度及风险效益选择合适药物。     

间歇充气加压与低分子肝素预防内科ICU高危病人下肢DVT的临床观察

目的探讨间歇充气加压（IPC）与低分子肝素（LMWH）预防内科高危病人下肢深静脉血栓（DVT）的效果和安全性。方法选取静脉血栓栓塞高风险病人100例,随机分为4组:IPC组、LMWH组、IPC+LMWH组和空白对照组。于治疗前及治疗后第1、4、7天,行下肢彩色多谱勒检查,观察各组腘静脉和股静脉的血流速度,判断是否存在血栓,同时检测活化部分凝血活酶时间（APTT）、血栓弹力图,比较各组发生下肢DVT的例数及不良事件。结果治疗前各治疗组与空白对照组APTT、血栓弹力图各指标差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）,治疗后各组APTT、血栓弹力图各指标与治疗前之间的差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）,治疗后各治疗组与空白对照组比较,APTT、血栓弹力图各指标的差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。各组治疗前腘静脉、股静脉平均血流速度差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）;与治疗前相比,IPC组及IPC+LMWH组平均血流速度增快（P < 0.01）,LMWH组与对照组平均血流速度均无明显变化（P>0.05）。IPC组发生下肢DVT 2例（8%）,LMWH组2例（8%）,IPC+LMWH组1例（4%）,空白对照组8例（32%）,各治疗组DVT发生率均低于对照组（P < 0.05~P < 0.01）。各组均未发生出血不良反应。结论应用IPC与低分子肝素是安全、有效地预防内科高危病人下肢DVT的方法。     

Anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with heart diseases

Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) were investigated in different cardiac diseases requiring anticoagulation. In case of short term usage advantages over intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) are of relevance, such as simple subcutaneous application, possibility for outpatient treatment and predictable effect on anticoagulation enabling abstention of laboratory monitoring in most cases. Thromboprophylaxis in acute medically ill patients and therapy of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) are important indications, in which significant advantages for special LMWH as compared to Placebo or UFH were shown. A significant effect versus Placebo was demonstrated for the LMWH Dalteparin in prolonged anticoagulation until revascularisation procedure in NSTE-ACS. Promising results from trials were also published concerning use of LMWH Dalteparin and Enoxaparin in TEE-guided cardioversion. Findings from cohort trials are available for temporary or long term switch from oral anticoagulation to LMWH. Due to limited data, determination of individual benefit-to-risk ratio is of special importance to select suitable anticoagulation regimen in this case. Further investigations as a basis of general recommendations on standard dosing regimen are outstanding for use of each LMWH in percutaneous coronary interventions, as combination with Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa-inhibitors, in acute myocardial infarction and in artificial heart valves. In cardiology, most studies were performed with Dalteparin and Enoxaparin, suggesting these to be used in established cardiac indications as well as in further investigations.     

A randomized comparative study of using enoxaparin instead of unfractionated heparin in the intervention treatment of coronary heart disease

Several international multicenter studies have demonstrated that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) was more effective than unfractionated heparin (UFH) in treating acute coronary syndrome (ACS).1-4 However, it remains uncertain whether LMWH can be used in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) instead of UFH. In an expert consensus on the use of LMWH in the catheter laboratory published in 2002,5 there were two recommendations which limited the use of LMWH in…     

Dalteparin: pharmacological properties and clinical efficacy in the prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolic diseases

Dalteparin is a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with a mean molecular weight of approximately 5,000. As with the other low molecular weight heparins, dalteparin has certain advantages over unfractionated heparin (UFH) most important of which are improved bio-availability by subcutaneous injection, a prolonged antithrombotic activity which is highly correlated with body weight permitting the once daily administration of the drug. Other possible advantages of LMWH including dalteparin include a lower incidence of heparin induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis and decreased tendency to produce osteopenia on prolonged administration. Dalteparin has been subjected to a large number of well designed randomised clinical trials for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. Based on data from the randomised clinical trials, dalteparin has been approved internationally for a wide spectrum of clinical indications.     

A comparative study of dextran-70, warfarin and low-dose heparin for the prophylaxis of thrombo-embolism following total hip replacement.

In a randomized, controlled clinical study, dextran-70, warfarin, or low-dose heparin were administered to patients undergoing total hip replacement on one surgical unit in an attempt to prevent deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Calf vein thrombosis was detected by the 125I-fibrinogen uptake test. None of the methods prevented calf vein thrombosis (dextran-70, 51%; warfarin, 58-6%; heparin, 52-6%). Pulmonary embolism was completely prevented in patients treated with warfarin but occurred in 4% of patients treated with dextran-70 and 15-5% of those treated with low-dose heparin. The incidence of complications of therapy was small and comparable in each group. It is suggested that calf vein thrombosis is a frequent and in itself a non-serious complication of total hip replacement surgery and that emphasis might be placed more usefully on prevention of pulmonary embolism.     

Reviparin sodium clivarine: a review of its therapeutic use

Reviparin sodium (clivarine) is a second generation LMWH, developed with the aim of maximising the antithrombotic action while minimising the risk of haemorrhage. Clivarine has been extensively studied in acute coronary syndrome. Various clinical studies in unstable angina and acute coronary syndrome have proved that clivarine in a dosage of 3436anti-Xa units twice daily is an effective antithrombotic agent. Clivarine has been shown to be as effective as unfractionated heparin (UFH) in thromboprophylaxis and it has less incidence of local haematoma at injection site. At a daily dose of 1432 IU anti-Xa it was found to be as effective as UFH in preventing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in moderate risk surgery (general and abdominal) and reducing to a significant extent DVT in patients with brace immobilisation of the legs. At a daily dose of 3436 IU anti-Xa reviparin was as effective as UFH or enoxaparin in preventing DVT in high risk orthopaedic surgery and as effective as UFH in prevention of DVT and/or pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or mortality in high risk orthopaedic surgery. In patients with acute venous thrombo-embolism (VTE), reviparin was more effective than UFH in thrombus reduction and at least as effective as UFH in the prevention of clinical recurrence of DVT and/or PE. The use of reviparin is associated with a similar or lower incidence of bleeding complications than UFH. The benefits of reviparin sodium have been demonstrated in a number of clinical trials.     

Cost-effectiveness of enoxaparin versus warfarin prophylaxis against deep-vein thrombosis after total hip replacement.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of enoxaparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin derivative, with that of low-dose warfarin in the prevention of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) after total hip replacement. DATA SOURCES: English-language articles on enoxaparin and warfarin prophylaxis is patients undergoing total hip replacement published from January 1982 to December 1992. STUDY SELECTION: Four trials of enoxaparin (involving 567 patients) and six trials of warfarin (involving 630) met the following criteria: randomized controlled trial, prophylaxis started no later than 24 hours after surgery and continued for at least 7 days, warfarin dose monitored and adjusted appropriately, enoxaparin dosage 30 mg twice daily, and DVT confirmed by bilateral venography. DATA EXTRACTION: Rates of DVT, cost of prophylaxis, diagnosis and treatment per patient, rate of pulmonary embolism (PE), number of deaths and incremental cost-effectiveness (cost per life-year gained). DATA SYNTHESIS: The pooled rate of DVT was 13.6% with enoxaparin (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.9% to 16.3%) and 20.6% with warfarin (95% CI 17.4% to 23.8%). At a cost of $19.55 per day for enoxaparin the total cost per patient, including prophylaxis and management of DVT, exceeded that per patient receiving warfarin by about $121. For every 10,000 patients treated the use of enoxaparin will prevent 47 cases of DVT, 3 cases of PE and 4 deaths. Thus, the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness of enoxaparin is $29 120 per life-year gained. CONCLUSION: On the basis of current Canadian cost-effectiveness guidelines the results of this study would be considered moderate to strong evidence to adopt enoxaparin prophylaxis against DVT after total hip replacement. However, because of the limited data the estimates are uncertain. Future trials should compare enoxaparin and warfarin and incorporate a prospective economic appraisal.     

Diagnosis and treatment of venous thromboembolism by consultants in Scotland

A questionnaire was sent to 508 consultants in Scotland likely to encounter deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism to assess their current standard practice in diagnosis and treatment of these disorders. Replies were received from 358 (70.5%). In deep vein thrombosis 47% and in pulmonary embolism 33% of consultants usually depended on clinical observation alone for diagnosis. In deep vein thrombosis 37% used venography to supplement clinical diagnosis and in pulmonary embolism 13% used angiography and 53% used isotopic scanning. Almost all consultants treated deep vein thrombosis (95%) and pulmonary embolism (99%) with anticoagulants. Most consultants (81%) gave heparin by intravenous infusion. Although many consultants gave intravenous heparin for more than three days (49.5% in deep vein thrombosis and 61% in pulmonary embolism), 25% of these consultants did not use any laboratory monitoring of heparin's effect. Large numbers of consultants gave warfarin for more than three months (20% in deep vein thrombosis and 47% in pulmonary embolism). There was a significant tendency to give heparin (p less than 0.01) and warfarin (p less than 0.001) for longer periods in pulmonary embolism than in deep vein thrombosis. This survey shows a widely varying practice and underlines the need for further controlled studies to provide clear guidance in the management of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.     

低分子肝素在冠心病介入治疗中的临床疗效研究

目的探讨低分子肝素（LMWH）在冠心病患者介入治疗（PCI）中应用的临床疗效。方法选择我院2008年9月，2011年3月期间于心内科经冠状动脉造影诊断为冠心病的患者86例，随机分为LMWH组43例和普通肝素（UFPI）组43例，观察比较两组采用介入治疗的途径、穿刺血肿发生率及术后两组患者不良心血管事件发生率。结果两组采取股动脉穿刺局部平均压迫止血时间及穿刺局部血肿发生率比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。LMWH组术后不良心血管事件的发生率明显低于UFH组，经比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论低分子肝素在冠心病介入治疗中是一种安全有效的治疗方法，值得临床推广。     

Antithrombotic therapy with low molecular weight heparin in cancer patients

Thrombosis is a common complication in patients with cancer. Low molecular weight heparins have been shown to be effective in both the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism in the cancer patient. More recently, studies have confirmed the benefits of extended duration of LMWH in the primary prevention of VTE after cancer surgery and for up to six months therapy for acute symptomatic VTE treatment. Beyond these well established uses for LMWH in the prevention and treatment of thrombosis in cancer patients, contemporary studies have demonstrated that LMWH therapy can prolong survival in patients with solid tumour malignant disease.     

妊娠合并深静脉血栓形成的病因及临床治疗

目的 探讨妊娠合并深静脉血栓形成(DVT)的病因和治疗措施.方法 回顾性分析中山大学附属第一医院1991-2010年29例住院妊娠合并DVT患者的临床资料,从诱因、病变部位、治疗方法 、预后以及妊娠情况进行分析.结果 DVT在早期妊娠期的发生率为69.0%(20/29).首位诱因为既往DVT病史,占所有诱发因素的24%(7/29);发生多左下肢,发生率为82.8%(24/29).抗凝是治疗的主要原则,首诊均采用肝素或低分子肝素(LMWH)抗凝治疗.7例患者一直采用LMWH治疗直至分娩前,胎儿发育正常;11例早期、2例中期患者于妊娠中期改为口服华法令,至孕34周左右改为LMWH,其中4例胎儿死亡,其余胎儿发育正常;9例早期患者选择终止妊娠.结论 出于孕妇和胎儿的安全考虑,妊娠DVT的治疗与一般DVT患者不同,LMWH或肝素抗凝是妊娠DVT治疗的安全有效措施.临床工作中应重视该疾病治疗的特殊性.     

Cholesterol-lowering therapy with pravastatin in patients with average cholesterol levels and established ischaemic heart disease: is it cost-effective?

OBJECTIVE: To measure the cost-effectiveness of cholesterol-lowering therapy with pravastatin in patients with established ischaemic heart disease and average baseline cholesterol levels. DESIGN: Prospective economic evaluation within a double-blind randomised trial (Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease [LIPID]), in which patients with a history of unstable angina or previous myocardial infarction were randomised to receive 40 mg of pravastatin daily or matching placebo. PATIENTS AND SETTING: 9014 patients aged 35-75 years from 85 centres in Australia and New Zealand, recruited from June 1990 to December 1992. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per death averted, cost per life-year gained, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained, calculated from measures of hospitalisations, medication use, outpatient visits, and quality of life. RESULTS: The LIPID trial showed a 22% relative reduction in all-cause mortality (P < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up of 6 years, hospital admissions for coronary heart disease and coronary revascularisation were reduced by about 20%. Over this period, pravastatin cost $A4913 per patient, but reduced total hospitalisation costs by $A1385 per patient and other long-term medication costs by $A360 per patient. In a subsample of patients, average quality of life was 0.98 (where 0 = dead and 1 = normal good health); the treatment groups were not significantly different. The absolute reduction in all-cause mortality was 3.0% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.4%), and the incremental cost was $3246 per patient, resulting in a cost per life saved of $107 730 (95% CI, $68 626-$209 881) within the study period. Extrapolating long-term survival from the placebo group, the undiscounted cost per life-year saved was $7695 (and $10 938 with costs and life-years discounted at an annual rate of 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Pravastatin therapy for patients with a history of myocardial infarction or unstable angina and average cholesterol levels reduces all-cause mortality and appears cost effective compared with accepted treatments in high-income countries.     

The epidemiology of disease expenses. The costs of caring for children with cancer

We determined medical costs and family out-of-pocket expenses over time for 569 children with malignant neoplasms. All medical charges (inpatient and outpatient), family out-of-pocket expenses, and wages lost were collected and annualized. The mean cost of cancer care and treatment per patient-year was $29,708, with variation by diagnosis, prognosis, and year since diagnosis. The mean annual hospital inpatient cost was $15,455; mean ambulatory care cost, $3,806; and family out-of-pocket disease-related expenses, $9,787. Family out-of-pocket expenses added about 50% to the total cost of disease-related care and consumed 38% of gross annual family income; wages lost accounted for nearly half. About 95% of all medical costs was paid by private, public, or charitable payers. Out-of-pocket medical expenses for which the family was responsible were about $1,000 each year. However, all nonmedical, disease-related expenses were borne by the family.     

丹参联合低分子肝素预防妇科盆腔术后下肢深静脉血栓形成临床观察

目的 观察丹参联合低分子肝素（LMWH）预防妇科盆腔术后下肢深静脉血栓（LEDVT）形成的疗效.方法 将256例患者随机分为低分子肝素钙预防组（对照组）和丹参联合低分子肝素钙预防组（观察组）各128例,观察两组LEDVT发生率、血液流变学、血浆凝血酶原时间（PT）及血浆活化部分凝血活酶时间（APTT）等指标变化.结果 两组 LEDVT发生率分别为8.59%和0.78%,观察组显著低于对照组（P ＜ 0.05）;观察组血液流变学指标、PT及APTT改善方面优于对照组,差异均有统计学意义（P ＜ 0.05）.结论 丹参联合低分子肝素可有效预防妇科盆腔术后LEDVT的形成,且不良反应少,值得推广应用.