MOLECULAR WEIGHT HEPARIN VS. UNFRACTIONED HEPARIN IN THE TREATMENT
OF DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS
E. Kurtalić, M. Dilić, S. Pehar and D. Kočo .
of Vascular Diseases, Clinical Center University of Sarajevo,
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Classic non-fractioned heparin is used for years in the therapy
of DVT. Fractioned, i.e.low molecular weight heparins (LMW) are
increasingly used in the last two decades. There are a number
of articles that LMW heparins are more safe in use, with the same
or better efficiency. Objectives: We want to compare efficiancy
of three types of heparin that we use in our daily work: non-fractioned
heparin, and LMWs heparins - reviparin (Clivarin-Knoll) and enoxaparin
(Clexane Rhone Poulenc). Methods and Material: We examined clinical
efficiancy of three types of heparin in patients with DVT treated
in our clinic in period 12/1999-12/2000. Total count of patients
was 88 (M 47, F 41). Average age was 55 with SD 14,99. We treated
47 patients (53,4%) with non-fractioned heparin, 30 patients (34,1%)
with reviparin, and 11 patients (12,5%) with enoxaparin. We have
assess clinical effect, which was scored as bad, moderately improved
and good. We have also analysed efficiancy of the three types
of heparin regarding localisation of thrombosis. Results: Efficiancy
of non-fractioned heparin was in 14,84 % of cases scored as bad,
29,68% as moderately improoved and in 57,24 % of cases as good.
Efficiancy of reviparin was in 23,31 % of cases scored as bad,
29,97 % as moderately improoved and in 46,2% of cases as good.
Efficiancy of enoxaparin was in 9,1% of cases scored as bad, 54,3%
as moderately improoved and in 36,5% of cases as good. Conclusion:
We have found that non-fractioned heparin had the best overall
effect, although our group of patients treated with enoxaparin
was too small to be definitely compared with other two groups.
In no group we had maior bleeding complications.