Why the study?
Do low-molecular-weight heparins improve outcomes compared to unfractionated heparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes?
Do low-molecular-weight heparins improve outcomes compared to unfractionated heparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes?
This review evaluates the role of low-molecular-weight heparins as an alternative to unfractionated heparin in the management of acute coronary syndromes.
LMWHs may be considered in ACS; leaves open whether they improve outcomes over UFH without new trials.
Acute coronary syndromes (unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction) are caused by the rupture of an atherosclerotic plaque, platelet activation, and fibrin deposition resulting in thrombosis. Aspirin and unfractionated heparin have traditionally been the treatments of choice for patients with acute coronary syndromes. Low-molecular-weight heparins offer potential advantages over unfractionated heparin, having proven equally effective for the treatment and prevention of many thromboembolic processes. Recently, a number of randomized controlled trials have been conducted to evaluate the role of low-molecular-weight heparins in the management of patients with unstable angina or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. The purpose of this article is to review and evaluate the available literature on the use of low-molecular-weight heparins in the management of acute coronary syndromes to establish their role in therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tisdale et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: