Why the study?
Does low-molecular-weight heparin improve safety and efficacy compared to unfractionated heparin or warfarin in patients with venous thrombosis?
Does low-molecular-weight heparin improve safety and efficacy compared to unfractionated heparin or warfarin in patients with venous thrombosis?
LMWH is a safe, effective, and cost-saving option for outpatient DVT treatment, though its efficacy for secondary prevention compared to warfarin requires further investigation.
Supports outpatient LMWH for acute DVT with cost savings; leaves open optimal secondary prevention versus warfarin.
LMWH preparations have been proven to be safe and effective in the outpatient management of acute DVT. Although LMWHs are more expensive than unfractionated heparin, the lack of need for laboratory monitoring of LMWHs and their potential for outpatient treatment more than offset the drug-related cost difference and result in a net cost savings in favor of LMWHs. LMWHs have undergone limited investigation for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism after an initial inpatient course of unfractionated haparin. To date, LMWHs have been given in prophylactic doses in these trials. In this setting, the LMWHs are associated with a similar risk for bleeding as fixed, intermediate-dose unfractionated heparin in patients with a high risk for bleeding. In patients with no increase in bleeding risk, fixed prophylactic-dose LMWH appears to be associated with both a lower risk for bleeding than warfarin (target INR of 2.0 to 3.0) and an increased risk for recurrence, although these findings need to be confirmed in larger trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Crowther et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: