Dabigatran: new drug. Continue to use heparin, a better-known option

(1) The standard anticoagulant for preventing thromboembolic events after hip or knee replacement surgery is a subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin such as enoxaparin; (2) Dabigatran, a specific thrombin inhibitor, was recently licensed for oral prophylaxis in this setting, as dabigatran etexilate (mesilate), a prodrug; (3) The clinical evaluation of dabigatran in this indication is based on two comparative double-blind trials with similar protocols, comparing dabigatran 150 mg or 220 mg/day versus enoxaparin in 3494 patients undergoing hip replacement surgery and 2101 patients undergoing knee replacement surgery. The results were virtually identical: compared with enoxaparin, dabigatran did not reduce overall mortality (almost zero in the different groups), the frequency of symptomatic pulmonary embolism (almost zero in the different groups), or the frequency of symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (0.1% to 1.2%); (4) There was no difference between the groups with respect to the frequency of severe bleeding (about 1.5%), hepatic disorders (about 4%), or acute coronary events (a few cases). But dabigatran was associated with surgical wound seepage in 7% of patients, versus 4.7% with enoxaparin; (5) The anticoagulant effect of dabigatran, and therefore the frequency of haemorrhage, increases with age and in cases of renal failure. However, clinical trials included relatively few elderly patients and/or patients with renal failure, who nonetheless represent a large proportion of the candidates for hip or knee replacement; (6) Dabigatran becomes more potent when combined with P-glycoprotein inhibitors or with drugs that impair renal function. Combination with other antithrombotic drugs should be avoided. (7) Dabigatran is administered orally, while enoxaparin requires daily subcutaneous injections. Dabigatran therapy does not necessitate laboratory monitoring, while the platelet count must be monitored with enoxaparin. There is no known antidote for dabigatran overdose; (8) In summary, for the prevention of venous thromboembolic events after orthopaedic surgery, it is better to continue to use heparins, at least pending more thorough evaluation of dabigatran.

Abstract aus PubMed (NCBI) für den zitierten Eintrag, in der Originalsprache wiedergegeben. Maßgeblich ist die Fassung der Originalpublikation.

Das Abstract wird nicht übersetzt, damit die eigene Wortwahl der Autoren erhalten bleibt.

Evaluation of dabigatran (oral direct thrombin inhibitor) versus enoxaparin for VTE prevention after hip/knee replacement showed no mortality, VTE, or major bleeding advantage, but more surgical wound seepage (7% vs 4.7%); recommends continuing heparin.

Erfahren Sie, wie diese Forschung mit der klinischen Praxis verknüpft ist

Weitere begutachtete Studien in der Kategorie „Arzneimittelentwicklung“.

• Hirudotherapie in Medizin und Zahnmedizin — Jha K et al. (2015)
• Blutegeltherapie: eine Geschichte — Hyson J (2005)
• Hirudine der asiatischen medizinischen Blutegelart Hirudinaria manillensis: gleich und doch verschieden — Lukas P et al. (2019)
• Transcriptomic analysis of the salivary gland of medicinal leech Hirudo nipponia — Lu Z et al. (2018)
• Molekulardynamische und pharmakologische Untersuchungen an durch Protein-Engineering erzeugten Hirudin-Varianten von Hirudinaria manillensis und Hirudo medicinalis — Sun Y et al. (2022)
• Zellfreie Synthese der Hirudin-Variante 1 des blutsaugenden Egels Hirudo medicinalis — Wüstenhagen D et al. (2020)
• Produktion von Hirudin-Varianten durch gentechnisch veränderte mikrobielle Zellfabriken — Zhang J, Lan N (2018)
• Hirudin bei heparininduzierter Thrombozytopenie — Lubenow N, Greinacher A (2002)
• Hirudin verbessert die diabetische Nephropathie durch Hemmung der Gsdmd-vermittelten Pyroptose — Han J et al. (2023)
• Hirudin als alternatives Antikoagulans – eine historische Übersicht — Markwardt F (2002)

Alle von der ASH analysierten Studien →