To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Potential efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin in preventing thromboembolic events

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
October 2014

Potential efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin in preventing thromboembolic events

Vol: 3| Issue: 10| Number:33| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Meta analysis
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:2

Prevention of venous thromboembolic events with low-molecular-weight heparin in the non-major orthopaedic setting: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Arthroscopy. 2014 Aug;30(8):987-96

Contributing Authors:
C Chapelle N Rosencher P Jacques Zufferey P Mismetti M Cucherat S Laporte Meta-Embol Group

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Data from 14 Level I or Level II randomized controlled trials (N=4726) was gathered in this meta-analysis. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin venous thromboprophylaxis versus placebo/no treatment in non-major orthopaedic patients with transient reduced mobility. Findings indicated significant risk reduction of thromboembolic events with prophylactic lo...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue