2007
DOI: 10.1001/jama.297.3.262-a
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fixed-Dose Unfractionated Heparin vs Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the study had a number of limitations. [29][30][31] Notably, three fourths of patients given a LMWH received dalteparin, which is not labeled for VTE treatment unless for long-term treatment in patients with cancer, and published data demonstrating efficacy over i.v. UFH are limited.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, the study had a number of limitations. [29][30][31] Notably, three fourths of patients given a LMWH received dalteparin, which is not labeled for VTE treatment unless for long-term treatment in patients with cancer, and published data demonstrating efficacy over i.v. UFH are limited.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These limitations and the lack of additional reports on the use of subcutaneous UFH for the treatment of DVT suggest that the use of subcutaneous UFH without aPTT monitoring for outpatient treatment may be premature. [29][30][31] Secondary VTE prevention in cancer patients. Long-term treatment of VTE ("secondary VTE prevention") already occurs in the outpatient setting with warfarin.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%