ReviewDrugs2004
Clinical experience with ximelagatran in orthopaedic surgery.
Review in Drugs, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients who undergo orthopaedic surgery are at substantially increased risk for venous thromboembolic events. These include proximal and distal deep vein thrombosis, with the former more likely to lead to pulmonary embolism and fatal complications. Anticoagulants are routinely used for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing total hip or total knee replacement surgery. Although current treatments offer effective prophylaxis, they have disadvantages. Warfarin is limited by the requirement for coagulation monitoring to ensure effective and safe use. Similarly, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) have disadvantages, including the need for parenteral administration. This article brings together data from clinical trials of the novel oral direct thrombin inhibitor, ximelagatran, in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing elective total hip or total knee replacement. The ximelagatran clinical trial programme in orthopaedic surgery has focused primarily on five large multicentre studies in Europe (the Melagatran Thromboprophylaxis in Orthopaedic surgery II and III and Expanded Prophylaxis Evaluation Surgery Study studies) and in the United States (the Exanta Used to Lessen Thrombosis A and B studies), which enrolled more than 8000 patients. In addition, the USA clinical trial programme included three other trials that investigated ximelagatran in orthopaedic surgery; two of these studies focused on prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee replacement, and one study investigated prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip replacement. These studies compared ximelagatran with the LMWHs dalteparin and enoxaparin and with warfarin, and were designed to reflect regional differences in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and to build on findings from previous studies. Generally, ximelagatran has been shown to possess comparable or greater efficacy relative to comparators. The timing and dose of ximelagatran have been shown to be important determinants of its efficacy and safety. As ximelagatran can be given in fixed oral dosing without coagulation monitoring, it is an attractive choice for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in major elective orthopaedic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.