Background:Critically ill patients are considered a high-risk group for developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Due to their impaired cardiopulmonary reserve, these VTEs may result in significant morbidity and mortality. In this study, we compared two types of low molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin, and bemiparin, as regards to their efficacy and safety in VTE prevention among Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients.Methods:This study was a prospective, randomized trial of 100 critically ill patients who are at high risk for developing VTE were included in this study and assigned to receive subcutaneous injections of either 3500 international units (IU) anti-factor Xa of bemiparin sodium or 40 mg of enoxaparin given once a day and patient were followed for 60 days after initiation of anticoagulant therapy for the development of documented deep venous thrombosis (DVT) using bilateral lower limb venous duplex, documented pulmonary embolism using computed tomography pulmonary angiography, and complications related to injectant anticoagulant.Results:Confirmed DVT was observed in two patients (4%) in the bemiparin group compared with 10 patients (20%) in the enoxaparin group with P < 0.05. Confirmed pulmonary embolism (PE) was observed in seven patients (14%) in the enoxaparin group with no recorded cases of confirmed PE in the bemiparin group (P < 0.05). No deaths were recorded in either group. Adverse events such as ecchymosis or hematoma at the injection site were observed in one patient (2%) in the bemiparin group and eight patients (16%) in the enoxaparin group (P < 0.05). There was no significant statistical difference between both groups as regards other adverse effects and complications related to the injectant anticoagulant.Conclusion:Bemiparin was superior to enoxaparin as a prophylactic anticoagulant for VTE in critically ill patients with less adverse local complications at the injection site. The study was registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov. Registration ID: NCT02795065. Registered June 8, 2016.

Authors' Contribution MZM and MA conceived and designed the experimental protocols. HM and MQ performed the experiments. MA and AM performed statistical analyses. HM and MZM prepared the manuscript. MA and MZM provided technical assistance in experiments. MZM and AM proofread the manuscript.

No abstract

No abstract