header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

MECHANICAL PROPHYLAXIS OF DEEP-VEIN THROMBOSIS WITH A FOOT-PUMP IN TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT, A RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL



Abstract

Introduction Venous thromboembolic disease is a serious complication of total hip replacement (THR). Use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has been shown to reduce the occurrence of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) significantly, but side effects such as bleeding and thrombocytopenia are frequent. Pneumatic compression with foot-pumps seems to provide the best balance of effectiveness and safety. However, a recent meta-analysis showed that the overall number of patients investigated in randomised clinical trials is too small to draw evidence-based conclusions regarding mechanical prophylaxis of DVT. This trial is a contribution in comparing the effectiveness and safety of mechanical versus chemical prophylaxis of DVT in patients managed with THR.

Methods Inclusion criteria were hip osteoarthritis, age less than 80 years, and uninterrupted use of a foot-pump. Exclusion criteria were a history of thromboembolic disease, heart disease, malignancy and bleeding diatheses. Two hundred and sixteen consecutive patients were considered for inclusion in the trial and were randomized either for management with (LMWH) (Fraxiparin, Sanofi -Synthelabo, France) or with the A-V Impulse foot-pump (Orthofix Vascular Novamedix, UK). All patients started mobilisation on crutches with partial weight-bearing on day two using compression stockings. The foot-pump was applied on both feet in the recovery room and was used until patient discharge. Management with the foot-pump was interrupted only during physiotherapy and toileting. A reverse Trendelenburg position (head-high, feet-low) was applied at rest to enhance the pneumatic effect of the pumps. Patients were monitored for DVT using serial duplex sonography (Sonoline Elegra, Siemens, Germany) at day three, 10 and 45 after surgery.

Results DVT was detected in three of 100 patients managed with the foot-pump compared with six of 100 patients who received chemical prophylaxis. Sixteen patients did not tolerate continuous use of the foot-pump and were excluded from the study. The average post-operative drainage was 259 ml in the foot-pump group and 328 ml in the control group (p=0.05). Patients with foot-pump had less swelling of the thigh (10 mm compared with 15 mm) (p=0.05). One patient developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

Conclusions This study confirms the effectiveness and safety of mechanical prophylaxis of DVT in THR, confirming the outcomes of previous randomized clinical trials. Some patients cannot tolerate the foot-pump, mostly because of sleep disturbance.

In relation to the conduct of this study, one or more of the authors is in receipt of a research grant from a non-commercial source.

The abstracts were prepared by Mr Jerzy Sikorski. Correspondence should be addressed to him at the Australian Orthopaedic Association, Ground Floor, William Bland Centre, 229 Macquarie Street, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia.