Skip to main content
. 2016 Mar 30;2016(3):CD004179. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004179.pub2

Summary of findings 2. Vitamin K antagonists compared to placebo for prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee replacement or hip fracture repair.

Vitamin K antagonists compared to placebo for prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee replacement or hip fracture repair
Patient or population: people requiring prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee replacement or hip fracture repair
 Setting: hospital and outpatient setting
 Intervention: vitamin K antagonists
 Comparison: placebo
Outcomes Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) Relative effect
 (95% CI) Number of participants
 (studies) Quality of the evidence
 (GRADE) Comments
Risk with placebo Risk with vitamin K antagonists
Symptomatic VTE (DVT and PE)
 Treatment duration 28 ‐ 42 days Study population OR 0.10
 (0.01 to 1.94) 360
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊕⊝
 MODERATE 1
23 per 1000 2 per 1000
 (0 to 43)
Symptomatic DVT (proximal or distal)
 Treatment duration 28 ‐ 42 days Study population OR 0.13
 (0.01 to 2.62) 360
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊕⊝
 MODERATE 1
17 per 1000 2 per 1000
 (0 to 43)
Symptomatic PE
 Treatment duration 28 ‐ 42 days Study population OR 0.32
 (0.01 to 7.84) 360
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊕⊝
 MODERATE 1
6 per 1000 2 per 1000
 (0 to 43)
Bleeding ‐ major
 Treatment duration 28 ‐ 42 days see comment OR 2.89
 (0.12 to 71.31) 360
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
 LOW 1 2 no events recorded in placebo group
Clinically relevant non‐major bleeding
 Treatment duration 28 ‐ 42 days see comment not reported
Minor bleeding
 Treatment duration 28 ‐ 42 days see comment not reported
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
 CI: confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; OR: odds ratio; PE: pulmonary embolism; RCT: randomised controlled trial; VTE: venous thromboembolism
GRADE Working Group grades of evidenceHigh quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
 Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
 Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
 Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 Downgraded by one level, results from a single study only so heterogeneity could not be assessed
 2 Downgraded by one level, number of events small leading to wide CI and imprecision of results