Key result
Thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin is at least as effective as unfractionated heparin with fewer bleeding complications, and more effective than placebo in medical patients.
Why the study?
Does thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduce the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and overall mortality in hospitalised medical patients compared to unfractionated heparin or placebo?
Does thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduce the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and overall mortality in hospitalised medical patients compared to unfractionated heparin or placebo?
LMWH is an effective and well-tolerated option for VTE prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients, offering advantages over UFH in terms of bleeding risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports LMWH for VTE prophylaxis in medical inpatients; leaves open optimal dosing and mortality effects in contemporary cohorts.
Timothy Norris (2004) conducted a review in Hospitalised medical patients at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) or placebo was evaluated. Thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin is at least as effective as unfractionated heparin with fewer bleeding complications, and more effective than placebo in medical patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: