2018
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012534.pub2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents for primary prevention of thrombosis in individuals with antiphospholipid antibodies

Abstract: There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate benefit or harm of using anticoagulants with or without ASA versus ASA alone in people with aPL antibodies and a history of recurrent pregnancy loss and with no such history; ASA versus placebo in people with aPL antibodies; and ASA with LMWH versus placebo or IVIG, and ASA with high-dose LMWH versus ASA with low-dose LMWH or UFH, in women with aPL antibodies and a history of recurrent pregnancy loss, for the primary prevention of thrombotic events. In a mixed popu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 91 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For this study, we enrolled women of reproductive age and the main criterion of the patient's selection was aPL positivity, which can be viewed as a limitation of the study. Similar subject selection strategy has been implemented by several researchers over the last few years, which in our view represents an important opportunity to raise awareness of potential adverse outcomes for aPL-positive pregnancies [5,[51][52][53][54][55]. Potential risk of aPL-positivity underestimation was reinforced by a recent study, which reported that aPL-positive women who did not fulfil the APS criteria had comparable pregnancy outcomes, gestational period, arterial and/or venous thrombosis, compared those with confirmed APS [56].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…For this study, we enrolled women of reproductive age and the main criterion of the patient's selection was aPL positivity, which can be viewed as a limitation of the study. Similar subject selection strategy has been implemented by several researchers over the last few years, which in our view represents an important opportunity to raise awareness of potential adverse outcomes for aPL-positive pregnancies [5,[51][52][53][54][55]. Potential risk of aPL-positivity underestimation was reinforced by a recent study, which reported that aPL-positive women who did not fulfil the APS criteria had comparable pregnancy outcomes, gestational period, arterial and/or venous thrombosis, compared those with confirmed APS [56].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…If higher INR levels (3.0-4.0) are needed, the risk of bleeding, but predominantly mild, increases significantly, approximately 2 to 2.5 times [77,78]. As for antiplatelet agents, the rate of bleeding during their prophylactic or therapeutic use appears to be low, and major bleeding is rare [78,79]. The risk of bleeding increases after invasive procedures, likely due to the use of bridging therapy, the early reintroduction of antithrombotics, and aggressive antithrombotic policies [80,81].…”
Section: Bleeding Associated With Antithrombotic Agentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These results were also confirmed by a recent Cochrane Review, showing that LDA treatment is associated with a similar thrombosis risk when compared to VKA treatment with or without LDA. However, the risk of minor bleedings (nasal bleedings, menorrhagia) was reported to be higher in subjects receiving VKA plus LDA [ 64 ].…”
Section: Prevention Strategies In Apl Carriersmentioning
confidence: 99%