-
Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics &... Mar 2020Due to the morbidity and mortality of mothers and fetuses developed by preeclampsia, preventive approaches have always been taken into account in high risk individuals....
Due to the morbidity and mortality of mothers and fetuses developed by preeclampsia, preventive approaches have always been taken into account in high risk individuals. Systematic review studies contribute to make a better decision about the results of such studies. Accordingly, this study strived to systematically study the factors effective in the prevention of preeclampsia. The MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Proquest databases were systematically reviewed between January 2000 and May 2019. The quality of the studies was analyzed using the CONSORT checklist. A study was conducted on 29 quality interventional studies; 28 of which were RCT type, and on various factors such as anticoagulants (heparin, enoxaparin, Dalteparin and Nadroparin), aspirin, paravastatin, nitric oxide, yoga, micronutrients Such as l-Arginine, Folic Acid, Vitamin E and C, Phytonutrient, Lycopene and Vitamin D alone or in combination with Calcium. The results of this study showed that low molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin, PETN, yoga, L arginine, folic acid, vitamin D prevented preeclampsia alone or combined with calcium.
Topics: Arginine; Calcium; Drug Therapy, Combination; Enoxaparin; Female; Folic Acid; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Pentaerythritol Tetranitrate; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Vitamin D; Yoga
PubMed: 32127134
DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2020.01.002 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2019Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with cancer. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been proved to be effective on anticoagulation...
Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Secondary Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Prospective Cohort Studies.
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with cancer. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been proved to be effective on anticoagulation therapy in many diseases. However, the efficacy and the safety of DOACs in the secondary prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) remain unclear. To assess the value of DOACs in patients with CAT, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from their earliest date through to June 2018. Two investigators independently assessed eligibility. Data were extracted by one investigator and verified by the second investigator. The efficacy outcome of this study was recurrent VTE, whereas the safety outcome was major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Relative risks (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were determined. To pool the results, the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects or random-effects models were used. A total of nine articles (six randomized controlled trials and three prospective studies) involving 2,697 patients with CAT who were prescribed DOACs (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran) and 2,852 patients who were prescribed traditional anticoagulants [vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), dalteparin, or enoxaparin] were compared. VTE recurrence in the DOAC group was significantly lower than that observed in the traditional anticoagulant group (RR: 0.60; 95%CI: 0.49-0.75; : 0%; < 0.00001). No significant difference in bleeding risk between both groups was found (RR: 0.95; 95%CI: 0.67-1.36; : 75%; = 0.79). Our findings showed that anticoagulant therapy with DOACs may be more effective than traditional anticoagulants to prevent recurrent VTE in patients with CAT, while the safety of DOACs may be equal to that of traditional anticoagulants. These findings support the use of DOACs as the first-line therapy for secondary prevention of CAT in most cancer patients.
PubMed: 31354488
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00773 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jun 2018To systematically evaluate the prophylaxis efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in the prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) after total knee... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
To systematically evaluate the prophylaxis efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in the prevention of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
METHOD
PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Wanfang, CNKI, and VIP databases were searched by index words to identify the eligible RCTs; relevant literature sources were also searched. The latest research was conducted in March 2017. Relative risks (RR), mean difference (MD), and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were used to analyze the main outcomes.
RESULT
A total of 22 articles were included in the meta-analysis with a total number of 11,320 patients (5543 in the LMWH group and 5777 in the control group). The results indicated that in the LMWH group, the incidence of DVT (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.77) and wound complications (SMD: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.75-1.22) was significantly lower than that in the control group. Furthermore, LMWH also increased the occurrence of bleeding event (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.31-1.88) and the total blood transfused (SMD: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04-0.19). However, no statistical difference was found in blood loss (SMD: -0.26, 95% CI: -0.65-0.14) between the two group. In the subgroup analysis, the incidence of DVT was significantly decreased in the ardeparin sodium group (OR: 0.70, 95%CI: 0.53-0.94) and the dalteparin group (OR:0.40, 95%CI:0.32-0.50).
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis demonstrated that LMWH is obviously efficacious in the prophylaxis of DVT after TKA. However, it has some negative effects, such as the increase in the number of bleeding events and the total blood transfused.
Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Blood Transfusion; Dalteparin; Female; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Postoperative Complications; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 29733996
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.04.059 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2018Compared with people without cancer, people with cancer who receive anticoagulant treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are more likely to develop recurrent VTE. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Compared with people without cancer, people with cancer who receive anticoagulant treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are more likely to develop recurrent VTE.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of three types of parenteral anticoagulants (i.e. fixed-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH), and fondaparinux) for the initial treatment of VTE in people with cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
A comprehensive search included a major electronic search of the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2018, Issue 1), MEDLINE (via Ovid) and Embase (via Ovid); handsearching of conference proceedings; checking of references of included studies; use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed; and a search for ongoing studies. This update of the systematic review was based on the findings of a literature search conducted on 14 January 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the benefits and harms of LMWH, UFH, and fondaparinux in people with cancer and objectively confirmed VTE.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Using a standardized form, we extracted data in duplicate on study design, participants, interventions outcomes of interest, and risk of bias. Outcomes of interested included all-cause mortality, symptomatic VTE, major bleeding, minor bleeding, postphlebitic syndrome, quality of life, and thrombocytopenia. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Of 15440 identified citations, 7387 unique citations, 15 RCTs fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These trials enrolled 1615 participants with cancer and VTE: 13 compared LMWH with UFH enrolling 1025 participants, one compared fondaparinux with UFH and LMWH enrolling 477 participants, and one compared dalteparin with tinzaparin enrolling 113 participants. The meta-analysis of mortality at three months included 418 participants from five studies and that of recurrent VTE included 422 participants from 3 studies. The findings showed that LMWH likely decreases mortality at three months compared to UFH (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 1.10; risk difference (RD) 57 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 101 fewer to 17 more; moderate certainty evidence), but did not rule out a clinically significant increase or decrease in VTE recurrence (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.76; RD 30 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 70 fewer to 73 more; moderate certainty evidence).The study comparing fondaparinux with heparin (UFH or LMWH) did not exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of fondaparinux on mortality at three months (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.81; RD 43 more per 1000, 95% CI 24 fewer to 139 more; moderate certainty evidence), recurrent VTE (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.54; RD 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 52 fewer to 63 more; moderate certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.66; RD 12 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 40 fewer to 44 more; moderate certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.66; RD 42 more per 1000, 95% CI 10 fewer to 132 more; moderate certainty evidence)The study comparing dalteparin with tinzaparin did not exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of dalteparin on mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.73; RD 33 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 135 fewer to 173 more; low certainty evidence), recurrent VTE (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.16; RD 47 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 77 fewer to 98 more; low certainty evidence), major bleeding (RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.20 to 23.42; RD 20 more per 1000, 95% CI 14 fewer to 380 more; low certainty evidence), or minor bleeding (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.21; RD 24 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 95 fewer to 164 more; low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
LMWH is possibly superior to UFH in the initial treatment of VTE in people with cancer. Additional trials focusing on patient-important outcomes will further inform the questions addressed in this review. The decision for a person with cancer to start LMWH therapy should balance the benefits and harms and consider the person's values and preferences.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Dalteparin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Fondaparinux; Hemorrhage; Heparin; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Neoplasms; Polysaccharides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Secondary Prevention; Tinzaparin; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 29363105
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006649.pub7 -
Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice :... Jan 2019Patients with cancer have an elevated risk of venous thromboembolism. Importantly, patients with cancer, who have metastatic disease, renal insufficiency, or are...
Low-molecular-weight heparins for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: A systematic literature review of efficacy and cost-effectiveness.
BACKGROUND
Patients with cancer have an elevated risk of venous thromboembolism. Importantly, patients with cancer, who have metastatic disease, renal insufficiency, or are receiving anticancer therapy, have an even higher risk of a recurrent event. Similarly, the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism is higher than the risk of an initial event. To reduce the risk, extended duration of prophylaxis for up to six months with low-molecular-weight heparins such as dalteparin, enoxaparin, nadroparin, and tinzaparin is recommended by international guidelines. In this paper, the clinical and economic literature is reviewed to provide evidenced based recommendations based on clinical benefit and economic value.
METHODS
A systematic review of major databases was conducted from January 1996 to October 2016 for randomized controlled trials evaluating the four distinct low-molecular-weight heparins against a vitamin K antagonists control group for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer. This was then followed by the application of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidance to assess the quality of all trials that met the inclusion criteria. Finally, the cost-effectiveness literature supporting the value proposition of each product was reviewed.
RESULTS
Six randomized trials met the inclusion criteria. There were one, two, and three trials that compared dalteparin, tinzaparin, and enoxaparin to a vitamin K antagonists control group. However, there were no trials for nadroparin in the setting of secondary venous thromboembolism prevention. In addition, only the dalteparin and one of the tinzaparin trials were of high quality and adequately powered. Of the two studies, only the dalteparin trial reported a statistically significant benefit in terms of venous thromboembolism absolute risk reduction when compared to a vitamin K antagonists control group (HR = 0.48; p = 0.002). In addition, there was robust pharmacoeconomic data from Canada, the Netherlands, France, and Austria supporting the cost-effectiveness of dalteparin for this indication. There were no such studies for any of the other agents.
CONCLUSIONS
The totality of high-quality clinical and cost-effectiveness data supports the use of dalteparin over other low-molecular-weight heparins for preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Neoplasms; Secondary Prevention; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 28857713
DOI: 10.1177/1078155217727140 -
Low-molecular-weight heparins for managing vaso-occlusive crises in people with sickle cell disease.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2015Sickle cell disease is one of the most common and severe genetic disorders in the world. It can be broadly divided into two distinct clinical phenotypes characterized by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sickle cell disease is one of the most common and severe genetic disorders in the world. It can be broadly divided into two distinct clinical phenotypes characterized by either haemolysis or vaso-occlusion. Pain is the most prominent symptom of vaso-occlusion, and hypercoagulability is a well-established pathogenic phenomenon in people with sickle cell disease. Low-molecular-weight heparins might control this hypercoagulable state through their anticoagulant effect. This is an update of a previously published version of this review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of low-molecular-weight heparins for managing vaso-occlusive crises in people with sickle cell disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches. We also searched abstract books of conference proceedings and several online trials registries for ongoing trials.Date of the last search of the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register: 28 September 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled clinical trials and controlled clinical trials that assessed the effects of low-molecular-weight heparins in the management of vaso-occlusive crises in people with sickle cell disease.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Study selection, data extraction, assessment of risk of bias and analyses were carried out independently by the two review authors.
MAIN RESULTS
Two studies comprising 287 participants were included. One study (with an overall unclear to high risk of bias) involved 253 participants and the quality of the evidence for most outcomes was very low. This study, reported that pain severity at day two and day three was lower in the tinzaparin group than in the placebo group (P < 0.01, analysis of variance (ANOVA)) and additionally at day 4 (P < 0.05 (ANOVA)). Thus tinzaparin resulted in more rapid resolution of pain, as measured with a numerical pain scale. The mean difference in duration of painful crises was statistically significant at -1.78 days in favour of the tinzaparin group (95% confidence interval -1.94 to -1.62). Participants treated with tinzaparin had statistically significantly fewer hospitalisation days than participants in the group treated with placebo, with a mean difference of -4.98 days (95% confidence interval -5.48 to -4.48). Two minor bleeding events were reported as adverse events in the tinzaparin group, and none were reported in the placebo group. The second study (unclear risk of bias) including 34 participants and was a conference abstract with limited data and only addressed one of the predefined outcomes of the review; i.e. pain intensity. After one day pain intensity reduced more, as reported on a visual analogue scale, in the dalteparin group than in the placebo group, mean difference -1.30 (95% confidence interval -1.60 to -1.00), with the quality of evidence rated very low. The most important reasons for downgrading the quality of evidence were serious risk of bias and imprecision (due to low sample size or low occurrence of events).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of two studies, evidence is incomplete to support or refute the effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparins in people with sickle cell disease. Vaso-occlusive crises are extremely debilitating for sufferers of sickle cell disease; therefore well-designed placebo-controlled studies with other types of low-molecular-weight heparins, and in participants with different genotypes of sickle cell disease, still need to be carried out to confirm or dismiss the results of this single study.
Topics: Anemia, Sickle Cell; Anticoagulants; Dalteparin; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Pain Measurement; Peripheral Vascular Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tinzaparin
PubMed: 26684281
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010155.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015Although superficial thrombophlebitis of the upper extremity represents a frequent complication of intravenous catheters inserted into the peripheral veins of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Although superficial thrombophlebitis of the upper extremity represents a frequent complication of intravenous catheters inserted into the peripheral veins of the forearm or hand, no consensus exists on the optimal management of this condition in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES
To summarise the evidence from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) concerning the efficacy and safety of (topical, oral or parenteral) medical therapy of superficial thrombophlebitis of the upper extremity.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Vascular Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched April 2015) and the Cochrane Register of Studies (2015, Issue 3). Clinical trials registries were searched up to April 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs comparing any (topical, oral or parenteral) medical treatment to no intervention or placebo, or comparing two different medical interventions (e.g. a different variant scheme or regimen of the same intervention or a different pharmacological type of treatment).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data on methodological quality, patient characteristics, interventions and outcomes, including improvement of signs and symptoms as the primary effectiveness outcome, and number of participants experiencing side effects of the study treatments as the primary safety outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 13 studies (917 participants). The evaluated treatment modalities consisted of a topical treatment (11 studies), an oral treatment (2 studies) and a parenteral treatment (2 studies). Seven studies used a placebo or no intervention control group, whereas all others also or solely compared active treatment groups. No study evaluated the effects of ice or the application of cold or hot bandages. Overall, the risk of bias in individual trials was moderate to high, although poor reporting hampered a full appreciation of the risk in most studies. The overall quality of the evidence for each of the outcomes varied from low to moderate mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision, with only single trials contributing to most comparisons. Data on primary outcomes improvement of signs and symptoms and side effects attributed to the study treatment could not be statistically pooled because of the between-study differences in comparisons, outcomes and type of instruments to measure outcomes.An array of topical treatments, such as heparinoid or diclofenac gels, improved pain compared to placebo or no intervention. Compared to placebo, oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduced signs and symptoms intensity. Safety issues were reported sparsely and were not available for some interventions, such as notoginseny creams, parenteral low-molecular-weight heparin or defibrotide. Although several trials reported on adverse events with topical heparinoid creams, Essaven gel or phlebolan versus control, the trials were underpowered to adequately measure any differences between treatment modalities. Where reported, adverse events with topical treatments consisted mainly of local allergic reactions. Only one study of 15 participants assessed thrombus extension and symptomatic venous thromboembolism with either oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or low-molecular-weight heparin, and it reported no cases of either. No study reported on the development of suppurative phlebitis, catheter-related bloodstream infections or quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence about the treatment of acute infusion superficial thrombophlebitis is limited and of low quality. Data appear too preliminary to assess the effectiveness and safety of topical treatments, systemic anticoagulation or oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Anticoagulants; Catheterization, Peripheral; Dalteparin; Diclofenac; Drug Combinations; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Escin; Gels; Heparin; Heparinoids; Humans; Ibuprofen; Nitroglycerin; Pentosan Sulfuric Polyester; Phospholipids; Polydeoxyribonucleotides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thrombophlebitis; Upper Extremity
PubMed: 26588711
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011015.pub2 -
European Journal of Clinical... Aug 2015Although therapeutic dosages of most low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are known to accumulate in patients with renal insufficiency, for the lower prophylactic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Although therapeutic dosages of most low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are known to accumulate in patients with renal insufficiency, for the lower prophylactic dosages this has not been clearly proven. Nevertheless, dose reduction is often recommended. We conducted a systematic review to investigate whether prophylactic dosages of LMWH accumulate in renal insufficient patients.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted on 17 February 2015 using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, PubMed publisher, and Google scholar. The syntax emphasized for LMWHs, impaired renal function, and pharmacokinetics. The search yielded 674 publications. After exclusion by reading the titles, abstracts, and if necessary the full paper, 11 publications remained.
RESULTS
For dalteparin and tinzaparin, no accumulation was observed. Enoxaparin, on the other hand, did lead to accumulation in patients with renal insufficiency, although not in patients undergoing renal replacement therapy. Bemiparin and certoparin also did show accumulation. No data were available for nadroparin.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we show that prophylactic dosages of tinzaparin and dalteparin are likely to be safe in patients with renal insufficiency and do not need dose reduction based on the absence of accumulation. However, prophylactic dosages of enoxaparin, bemiparin, and certoparin did show accumulation in patients with a creatinine clearance (CrCl) below 30 ml/min, and therefore, dose reduction is required. The differences in occurrence of accumulation seem to depend on the mean molecular weight of LMWHs.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Renal Insufficiency; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 26071276
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-015-1880-5