Why the study?
Does unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin prevent venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients?
Does unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin prevent venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients?
This review highlights the importance of assessing VTE risk and selecting appropriate prophylaxis (unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin) for acutely ill medical patients.
May support VTE prophylaxis selection in medical inpatients; leaves open optimal regimens in contemporary cohorts.
Each year millions of patients experience a venous thromboembolic event. Due to the significant morbidity and mortality associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE), prevention is critical. Several groups, such as those undergoing orthopedic or general surgery, and patients experiencing acute myocardial infarction, are known to be at high risk for VTE. General medical patients-the medically ill-are also at risk, but they receive insufficient prophylaxis, which may be due to underestimation or lack of assessment of their risk. The American College of Chest Physicians recommends either unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin to prevent VTE in these patients. The different pharmacologic profiles and dosing methods of these two groups of agents suggest that efficacy and safety may not be equivalent. Due to heterogeneity of medically ill patients and variability in clinical trials, a detailed review of the literature was performed to assist clinicians in assessing risk and choice of a regimen to prevent VTE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Enders et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: