Journal Home
Search for

Volume 90, Issue 2, Pages 232-245 (February 2009)


View previous. 10 of 31 View next.

Venous Thromboembolism After Spinal Cord Injury

Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Evidence Review Research TeamRobert W. Teasell, MD, FRCPCabCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Jane T. Hsieh, MScb, Jo-Anne L. Aubut, BAb, Janice J. Eng, PhDcde, Andrei Krassioukov, MD, PhD, FRCPCdef, Linh Tu, HonBHScb

Abstract 

Teasell RW, Hsieh JT, Aubut JL, Eng JJ, Krassioukov A, Tu L, for the Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Evidence Review Research Team. Venous thromboembolism after spinal cord injury.

Objective

To review systematically the published literature on the treatment of deep venous thromboembolism after spinal cord injury (SCI).

Data Sources

MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched for articles addressing the treatment of deep venous thromboembolism post-SCI. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed for methodologic quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale, while non-RCTs were assessed using the Downs and Black evaluation tool.

Study Selection

Studies included RCTs, non-RCTS, cohort, case-control, case series, pre-post, and postinterventional studies. Case studies were included only when no other studies were available.

Data Extraction

Data extracted included demographics, the nature of the study intervention, and study results.

Data Synthesis

Levels of evidence were assigned to the interventions using a modified Sackett scale.

Conclusions

Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies examined various pharmacologic interventions for the treatment or prevention of deep venous thrombosis in patients with SCI. There was strong evidence to support the use of low-molecular-weight heparin in reducing venous thrombosis events, and a higher adjusted dose of unfractionated heparin was found to be more effective than 5000 units administered every 12 hours, although bleeding complications were more common. Nonpharmacologic treatments were also reviewed, but again limited evidence was found to support these treatments.

a Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada

b Aging, Rehabilitation and Geriatric Care Program, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, ON, Canada

c Cardiovascular Physiology and Rehabilitation Laboratory, Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

d Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

e International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries, Vancouver, BC, Canada

f Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Robert W. Teasell, MD, FRCPC, Dept of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Parkwood Hospital, Hobbins Building, Ste 404, 801 Commissioners Rd E, London, ON, Canada N6C 5J1

 Supported by the Ontario Neurotrauma Fund (grant no. 2007-SCI-SCIRE-528) and the Rick Hansen Man in Motion Foundation/International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries (ICORD) (grant no. Rick Hansen 2008-13).

 No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on the authors or on any organization with which the authors are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(08)01564-5

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2008.09.557


View previous. 10 of 31 View next.