• T O Smith, R Taylor, and C B Hing.
• School of Allied Health Professions, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, NR4 7TJ, UK. toby.smith@uea.ac.uk.
• Eur J Trauma Emerg S. 2011 Oct 1;37(5):479-90.

PurposeVenous thromboembolic disease following skeletal polytrauma is a major issue for trauma surgeons, but there is no consensus of opinion regarding the optimal form of prophylaxis. The purpose of this paper was to compare the incidence of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) after major skeletal trauma managed with different prophylactic methods and their combinations.MethodsA search of AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases was performed from their inception to July 2010. A search of unpublished literature databases was undertaken. All randomised controlled trials assessing the incidence of VTE events between two or more forms of thromboprophylaxis for patient following major skeletal trauma were included. Two reviewers independently identified all eligible articles, extracted the data, and critically appraised all included publications using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool.ResultsA total of 11 papers were identified. The findings of this study suggest that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) may be superior to low dose heparin (LDH), and that LMWH should be used in addition to mechanical prophylaxis measures in patients following major skeletal trauma. There is limited evidence for the use of electrostimulation. There appeared to be no significant difference between the use of LDH compared to calf compression devices. However, the evidence-base was insufficient in both size and methodological quality.ConclusionsThere is currently insufficient research to be able to inform trauma surgeons as to the optimal method of thromboprophylaxis for patients following major skeletal trauma.

6 keywords...

hide…