Coumadin vs. Lovenox after joint replacement

I know this is an old post, but wanted to add my 2c anyway
Lovenox ,arixta and fragmin are all heparin.

Coumadin would be used to treat a DVT or PE as the patient is fully anticoagulated.
Anticoagulation with coumadin may be a cheap option regarding the drug cost- but the cost of good monitoring and cost of side effects have to be added into the equation.
LMWH can be given at a prophylactic dose or therapeutic dose ie for prevention of DVT in high risk patients (ie after lower limb joint replacement) or for treatment of DVT/PE. I wonder which ones these patients get?
I was also interested in the best practice evidence for use of coumadin versus LMWH after joint replacement.

Here in the UK we use Tinzaparin for prophylaxis, and would NEVER use coumadin unless patient was on it before surgery or was diagnosed with a PE. There is very strong evidence for this regime.

This is a great thread, glad it's being kept alive. About half our surgeons use Lovenox, half Coumadin, and one uses ASA (that one only does knees).

NurseTink, do you know of any data showing increases in DVT/PE with sole use of ASA? I'm very curious about this. If some surgeons are using ASA across the board (UNLESS pt is already on Coumadin or can't tolerate NSAIDS), I am curious why ASA seems to be the LEAST used, since it's cheap, OTC, requires no monitoring, and a large portion of adult patients are already taking 81-325mg QD for primary cardiovascular disease prevention.

I've wondered this for a while. Does anyone have any insights on this?