We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Low molecular weight heparin (enoxaparin) versus oral anticoagulant therapy (acenocoumarol) in the long-term treatment of deep venous thrombosis in the elderly: a randomized trial.
Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2000 October
This study aims to establish the relative effectiveness and safety of low molecular weight heparin in elderly patients with venous thrombosis in order to find an alternative to oral anticoagulant therapy with less bleeding complications in the long-term treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). One hundred consecutive elderly patients (>75 years old) with venographically demonstrated proximal DVT were included in a randomized trial. All patients were treated for ten days with adjusted doses of intravenous heparin. Informed consent was obtained and on the eight day, patients were randomly allocated to receive acenocoumarol (INR 2.0-3.0) or subcutaneous enoxaparin (4000 anti-Xa units once a day) for three months. All patients were followed-up clinically and venographically for a one year period. The results were analyzed with Fisher's exact test or chi-square test as appropriate. During the treatment and surveillance period, 6 of the 50 patients (12%) who received acenocoumarol and 8 of the 50 patients (16%) who received enoxaparin had new episodes of venous thromboembolism confirmed by objective testing (p = 0.6; 95% CI for the difference: -19.5 to 11.5). Hemorrhagic complications occurred in six of the 50 patients (12%) who received acenocoumarol and in one (2%) of those on enoxaparin (p = 0.1; 95% CI for the difference: -1.8 to 21.8). Vertebral fractures developed in 2 patients (4%) in the enoxaparin group (p = 0.5; 95% CI for the difference: -11.4 to 3.4). These results show that fixed dose enoxaparin seems to be effective and safe in the long-term treatment of proximal DVT in the elderly. In comparison with oral anticoagulants, the findings are inconclusive due to the wide confidence intervals for differences between outcomes, however they suggest that the former may have less bleeding complications with similar efficacy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app