Key result
This review highlights the comparative effectiveness of various antithrombotic therapies for venous thromboembolism in heart failure patients and emphasizes the low rates of preventive administration.
Why the study?
What is the comparative effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of antithrombotic therapies for preventing venous thromboembolism in patients with heart failure?
What is the comparative effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of antithrombotic therapies for preventing venous thromboembolism in patients with heart failure?
This review highlights the importance of antithrombotic therapy for preventing venous thromboembolism in heart failure patients and notes the underutilization of preventive treatments.
Low VTE prophylaxis rates in HF signal a care gap; leaves open optimal antithrombotic regimen.
This review is focussed on the problem of venous thromboembolism in patients with heart failure (HF). The results of the major clinical trials of antithrombotic therapy in HF patients are presented. The authors discuss comparative effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of unfractionated heparins, low molecular weight heparins, and fondaparinux. The results of the two trials, MAGELLAN and ADOPT, are expected to clarify the clinical potential of such oral anticoagulants as rivaroxaban and apixaban (Factor Xa inhibitors). The problem of low rates e of preventive antithrombotic administration is emphasized.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Аверков et al. (2011) conducted a review in Venous thromboembolism in heart failure. Antithrombotic therapy was evaluated. This review highlights the comparative effectiveness of various antithrombotic therapies for venous thromboembolism in heart failure patients and emphasizes the low rates of preventive administration.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: