Differences in the safety profiles of two low-molecular-weight heparins

• References

• 1 Grey E, Mulloy B, Barrowcliffe TW. Heparin and low molecular weight heparin. Thromb Haemost 2008; 99: 807-818.
• 2 Hull RD, Pineo GF. Low molecular weight heparin in the treatment of venous thromboembolism. Semin Thromb Hemost 2000; 26 (Suppl. 01) 61-67.
• 3 Geerts WH, Heij JT, Clagget GP. et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. Chest 2001; 119 (Suppl. 01) 132S-175S.
• 4 Ofosu FA. Laboratory markers quantifying prothrombin activation and actions of thrombin in venous and arterial thrombosis do not accurately assess disease severity or the effectiveness of treatment. Thromb Haemost 2006; 96: 568-577.
• 5 Bounameaux H, De Moerloose P. Is laboratory monitoring of low-molecular-weight heparin therapy necessary? No. J Thromb Haemost 2004; 2: 551-558.
• 6 Harenberg J. Is laboratory monitoring of low-molecular weight heparin therapy necessary? Yes. J Thromb Haemost 2004; 2: 547-550.
• 7 Planes A. An equivalence study of two low molecular weight heparins in the prevention and treatment of deep-vein thrombosis after total hip replacement. Semin Thromb Hemost 2000; 26 (Suppl. 01) 57-60.
• 8 Planes A. Comparison of antithrombotic efficacy and haemorrhagic side-effects of clivarin versus enoxaparin in patients undergoing total hip replacement surgery. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 1993; 4 (Suppl. 01) 533-535.
• 9 Planes A, Vochelle N, Fagola M. et al. Comparison of two low-molecular-weight heparins for the prevention of post-operative venous thromboembolism after elective hip surgery. Reviparin Study Group. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 1998; 9: 499-505.
• 10 Navarro-Quilis A, Castellet E, Rocha E. et al. Bemiparin Study Group in Knee Artheroplasty. Efficacy and safety of bemiparin compared with enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. J Thromb Haemost 2003; 1: 425-432.
• 11 Simmonneau G, Laporte S, Mismetti P. et al. FX140. Study Investigators. A randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of nadroparin 2850 IV (0.3 mL) versus enoxaparin 4000 IV (40 mg) in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after colorectal surgery for cancer. J Thromb Haemost 2006; 4: 1693-1700.
• 12 Prandoni P. Low molecular weight heparins: are they interchangeable? Yes. J Thromb Haemost 2003; 1: 10-11.
• 13 Nenci GG. Low molecular weight heparins: are they interchangeable? No. J Thromb Haemost 2003; 1: 12-13.
• 14 Kistler U, Kramers-de Quervain I, Munzinger U. et al. Bleeding complications after systemic switch of routine prophylaxis for major orthopedic surgery. Thromb Haemost 2008; 99: 1049-1052.
• 15 Geerts WH, Pineo GF, Heit JA. et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. The Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest 2004; 126: 338S-400S.
• 16 Schellong S, Hesseschwevdt HJ, Paar WD. et al. Rates of proximal deep vein thrombosis as assessed by compression ultrasonography in patients receiving prolonged prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin after major orthopedic surgery. Thromb Haemost 2005; 94: 532-536.
• 17 Arnesen H, Dahl OE, Aspelia T. et al. Sustained prothrombotic profile after hip replacement surgery: the influence of prolonged prophylaxis with dalteparin. J Thromb Haemost 2003; 1: 971-975.