Key result
In a review of patients with mechanical heart valves, LMWH therapy was associated with an overall thromboembolism rate of 0.9% and a hemorrhage rate of 3.4%.
Why the study?
Is low-molecular-weight heparin safe and effective for preventing thromboembolism in patients with mechanical heart valves?
Population
Patients with mechanical heart valves requiring interruption of oral anticoagulants (n=352 from 8 series)
Comparison
Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs Unfractionated heparin or none
Design
Review
Authors
Loading...
Short-term LMWH may be an option in mechanical valves; leaves open need for RCTs to guide practice.
Is low-molecular-weight heparin safe and effective for preventing thromboembolism in patients with mechanical heart valves?
Short-term LMWH therapy appears to compare favorably with unfractionated heparin in patients with mechanical heart valves, though randomized data are lacking.
Shapira et al. (2002) conducted a review in Mechanical heart valves (n=352). Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs. Unfractionated heparin (UH) was evaluated on Thromboembolism. In a review of patients with mechanical heart valves, LMWH therapy was associated with an overall thromboembolism rate of 0.9% and a hemorrhage rate of 3.4%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: