Skip to main content

Aspirin effective in preventing blood clots after surgery, study finds

A landmark study finds that aspirin works just as well as the blood thinner heparin at preventing blood clots in patients who have surgery for broken bones.

This could change the standard of care for these types of patients in the future. For example, patients who need surgery for fractures are usually given heparin to prevent blood clots for weeks after surgery, and the medicine needs to be injected.



The clinical trial findings were released at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association’s annual meeting in Florida on Thursday. The study was co-led by the Department of Orthopaedics at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium based at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

“We expect our findings from this large scale trial to have an important impact on clinical practice and potentially even change the standard of care,” said Dr. Robert V. O’Toole of the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

More than 12,000 patients who needed surgery for broken arms, legs or pelvic fractures took part in the study over four years at 21 trauma centers in the U.S. and Canada. Half of those in the study were given aspirin, while the rest received heparin over 90 days.

The study’s main finding shows that aspirin is no worse than heparin at preventing death from any cause. According to the data, 47 patients that took aspirin died compared to 45 who took heparin.

“With data from more than 12,000 patients, this study provides clear evidence that aspirin is a viable option for preventing blood clots in the lung and death in patients who require surgery for orthopaedic trauma,” said Andrew Pollak, senior vice president and chief clinical officer for the University of Maryland Medical System.

The study is considered the largest ever conducted on orthopedic trauma patients.

Massachusetts court hears arguments in lawsuit alleging Meta designed apps to be addictive to kids

BOSTON (AP) — Massachusetts' highest court heard oral arguments Friday in the state's lawsuit arguing that Meta designed features on Facebook and Instagram to make them addictive to young users. The lawsuit, filed in 2023 by Attorney General Andrea Campbell, alleges that Meta did this to make a profit and that its actions affected hundreds of thousands of teenagers in Massachusetts who use the social media platforms. “We are making claims based only on the tools that Meta has developed because its own research shows they encourage addiction to the platform in a variety of ways,” said State Solicitor David Kravitz, adding that the state's claim has nothing to do the company's algorithms or failure to moderate content. Meta said Friday that it strongly disagrees with the allegations and is “confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people.” Its attorney, Mark Mosier, argued in court that the lawsuit “would impose liabilities for performing traditional publishing functions” and that its actions are protected by the First Amendment.
Read Next Story