American Society of Hirudotherapy

Comparison of alteplase and heparin in maintaining the patency of paediatric central venous haemodialysis lines: a randomised controlled trial.

Randomized controlled trial published in Archives of disease in childhood (2006)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Randomized controlled trialClinical TrialsDrug DevelopmentGittins et al. · Archives of disease in childhood, 2006

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the tissue plasminogen activator, alteplase, is more effective than heparin in preventing blood clots developing in children's haemodialysis central lines between dialysis sessions. DESIGN: A prospective double-blind, within-patient multiperiod cross-over controlled trial of instilling a "lock" of either heparin 5000 U/ml or alteplase 1 mg/ml into the central lines of two children haemodialysed twice weekly, and seven dialysed thrice weekly, over 10 weeks. SETTING: A UK paediatric nephrology unit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Weight of blood clot aspirated from the line at the start of the next dialysis session. RESULTS: The odds of a clot forming was 2.4 times greater with heparin than alteplase (95% CI 1.4 to 4.0; p = 0.001), and when present they were 1.9 times heavier (31 vs 15 mg; 95% CI 1.5 to 2.4; p<0.0005). There was no effect of inter-dialytic interval. One child required an alteplase infusion to clear a blocked line following a heparin lock. We subsequently changed our routine locks from heparin to alteplase. Comparing the year before and after that change, the incidence of blocked lines requiring an alteplase or urokinase infusion fell from 2.7 to 1.2 per child (p<0.03), and the need for surgical replacements from 0.7 to nil (p<0.02). CONCLUSION: Alteplase is significantly more effective than heparin in preventing clot formation in central haemodialysis lines. This reduces morbidity and improves preservation of central venous access. It is more expensive, though relatively economic if packaged into syringes and stored frozen until needed, but reduces the costs of unblocking or replacing clotted lines.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeComparative StudyJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled Trial
Indexed MeSH termsCatheterization, Central VenousCatheters, IndwellingChildCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodFibrinolytic AgentsHeparinHumansProspective StudiesRenal DialysisTissue Plasminogen ActivatorTreatment Outcome

Summary

To determine whether the tissue plasminogen activator, alteplase, is more effective than heparin in preventing blood clots developing in children's haemodialysis central lines between dialysis sessions. A prospective double-blind, within-patient multiperiod cross-over controlled trial of instilling...

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This prospective double-blind, within-patient multiperiod cross-over controlled trial compared alteplase versus heparin as locking solutions to prevent blood clots in pediatric central venous haemodialysis lines in nine children over 10 weeks. The abstract reports that alteplase was significantly more effective than heparin, with 2.4-fold lower odds of clot formation and lighter clots when present. The study examines pharmaceutical anticoagulation management of dialysis catheters. The abstract contains no mention of leeches, hirudotherapy, or any leech-derived compounds, so its relevance to the ASH domain is entirely indirect, limited only to contextual background on anticoagulant use in a clinical setting.

Citation

Comparison of alteplase and heparin in maintaining the patency of paediatric central venous haemodialysis lines: a randomised controlled trial.

Gittins et al. · Archives of disease in childhood, 2006

Added to ASH library: May 28, 2026 · Site last updated: June 18, 2026

This website provides educational information and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment recommendations. Medicinal leech therapy carries clinically meaningful risks and should be performed only by qualified clinicians under institutionally approved protocols. FDA 510(k) clearance for medicinal leeches is limited to specific indications; investigational and off-label discussions are labeled accordingly. For patient-specific guidance, consult a qualified healthcare provider.