Key result
Newer oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are analyzed in this review of current literature for their potential use and effectiveness in treating venous thromboembolism.
Why the study?
Traditional anticoagulation with LMWH and VKAs requires frequent INR monitoring, while NOACs may offer an effective alternative in venous thromboembolism.
Are newer oral anticoagulants (NOACs) effective and safe for the treatment of venous thromboembolism compared to traditional anticoagulants?
Are newer oral anticoagulants (NOACs) effective and safe for the treatment of venous thromboembolism compared to traditional anticoagulants?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review analyzes the literature on the use of NOACs as an alternative to LMWH and VKAs for the management of venous thromboembolism.
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is an important medical condition for morbidity and mortality. Adequate anticoagulant treatment is necessary to reduce short- and long-term VTE related conditions. In the past low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) have been the mainstay of anticoagulation therapy for VTE patients. The patients require frequent monitoring with INR to keep balance between effectiveness and safety in clinical practice. NOACs have been the main stay of treatment in conditions requiring effective anticoagulation. They may prove to do the same in VTE. This article analyses, the present literature on use of NOACs in VTE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Modi et al. (2021) conducted a review in Venous thromboembolism (VTE). Newer Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was evaluated. Newer oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are analyzed in this review of current literature for their potential use and effectiveness in treating venous thromboembolism.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: