Objective To systematically assess the therapeutic effect of rivaroxaban and enoxaparin on preventing deep venous thrombosis after major orthopedic operation. Methods Such databases as MEDLINE, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2009), Current Controlled Trials, The National Research Register, CBM, and CNKI were searched from their establishment to December 2009 in whatever language. Related journals were handsearched as well. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of comparing therapeutic effects of rivaroxaban and enoxaparin on preventing deep venous thrombosis after major orthopedic operation were included. Data were extracted and their quality was evaluated, and meta-analyses were conducted by using RevMan 5.0.25 software. Results Seven RCTs with 15 458 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that compared with enoxaparin, rivaroxaban reduced the end risk of the primary efficacy to 60% (RR=0.40, 95%CI 0.28 to 0.57, Plt;0.000 01) and reduced the end risk of the main secondary efficacy to 71% (RR=0.29, 95%CI 0.15 to 0.56, Plt;0.000 01), and the end risk of other efficacy to 56% (RR=0.44, 95%CI 0.29 to 0.66, Plt;0.000 01). During the treatment, rivaroxaban and enoxaparin displayed similarity in terms of the incidence of serious bleeding events (RR=1.16, 95%CI 0.68 to 1.999, P=0.59) and the secondary safety endpoint. Conclusion Rivaroxaban is effective in preventing deep venous thrombosis after major orthopedic operation and can significantly reduce the risk of postoperative deep vein thrombosis.
Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intermittent pneumatic compression in prevention of deep venous thrombosis after major orthopedic operation. Methods We searched MEDLINE (1966 to January 2008), The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2008), CBM (1996 to January 2008), CNKI (1998 to January 2008), VIP (1998 to January 2008), and retrieved clinical controlled trials (CCTs) or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which IPC was used as an intervention to prevent DVT, and all the trials were published in English or Chinese. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed according to the standard of Cochrane systematic review. RevMan 4.2 software was used for meta-analysis. Results Seven RCTs and 1 CCT were included. Their methodological quality was poor. The results of Meta–analyses showed: (1) The incidence of DVT in the IPC group was lower than that in the control group (RR=0.20, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.35, Plt;0.000 01); (2) There was no difference in the incidence of DVT between the IPC group and the LMWH group (RR=0.70, 95%CI 0.28 to 1.74, P=0.44); (3) The incidence of DVT in the IPC plus LMWH group was lower than that in the LMWH-alone group (RR=0.23, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.52, P=0.000 4). Furthermore, the incidence of DVT in the IPC plus LMWH group was lower than that in the GCS plus LMWH group (Plt;0.000 1). No severe adverse reaction of IPC in DVT prevention was reported. Conclusion IPC shows an effective tendency in DVT prevention, but because of the low quality and the small sample of the included studies, this conclusion needs to be verified by protocols of more samples and high quality.