Annals of internal medicine
-
Review Meta Analysis
Extended out-of-hospital low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis against deep venous thrombosis in patients after elective hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.
Evidence-based medicine guidelines based on venographic end points recommend in-hospital prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients having elective hip surgery. Emerging data suggest that out-of-hospital use may offer additional protection; however, uncertainty remains about the risk-benefit ratio. To provide clinicians with a practical pathway for translating clinical research into practice, we systematically reviewed trials comparing extended out-of-hospital LMWH prophylaxis versus placebo. ⋯ Extended LMWH prophylaxis showed consistent effectiveness and safety in the trials (regardless of study variations in clinical practice and length of hospital stay) for venographic deep venous thrombosis and symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The aggregate findings support the need for extended out-of-hospital prophylaxis in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty surgery.
-
Overwhelming evidence now indicates that the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) is less than optimal. Recent methodologic analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which boast the elimination of systematic error as their primary hallmark. ⋯ Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT statement, this explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated Web site ( http://www.consort-statement.org ) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomized trials. Throughout the text, terms marked with an asterisk are defined at end of text.
-
To comprehend the results of a randomized, controlled trial (RCT), readers must understand its design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors. Despite several decades of educational efforts, the reporting of RCTs needs improvement. ⋯ The diagram explicitly includes the number of participants, for each intervention group, that are included in the primary data analysis. Inclusion of these numbers allows the reader to judge whether the authors have performed an intention-to-treat analysis. In sum, the CONSORT statement is intended to improve the reporting of an RCT, enabling readers to understand a trial's conduct and to assess the validity of its results.
-
Because of radiographic evidence of progressive bone loss and the inability to eliminate synovial proliferation with methotrexate, it became apparent that therapy for rheumatoid arthritis needed further advancement. Methotrexate is not a remission-inducing drug and may have dose-limiting toxicity. In the past 2 years, three new disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have been approved: leflunomide, etanercept, and infliximab. ⋯ The ultimate value of combination DMARD therapy with methotrexate will be determined by long-term data on safety, efficacy, and effects on radiographic deterioration of bone. Additional long-term observational data on the incidence of joint arthroplasty and disability will help to place the issue of societal costs in a better perspective. This will allow the value of aggressive treatment to be established with certainty.
-
Review Case Reports
Warfarin therapy for an octogenarian who has atrial fibrillation.
In North America, atrial fibrillation is associated with at least 75 000 ischemic strokes each year. Most of these strokes occur in patients older than 75 years of age. The high incidence of stroke in very elderly persons reflects the increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation that occurs with advanced age, the high incidence of stroke in elderly patients, and the failure of physicians to prescribe antithrombotic therapy in most of these patients. ⋯ Instead, we choose to leave the patient in atrial fibrillation and to control his ventricular rate with atenolol. Later, when the INR increases to 4.9, we advocate withholding one dose of warfarin and repeating the INR test. Finally, when the patient develops dental pain, we review the analgesic agents that are safe to take with warfarin and explain why warfarin therapy does not have to be interrupted during a subsequent dental extraction.