ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2009
A prospective cohort study on the effectiveness of 3500 IU versus 5000 IU bemiparin in the prophylaxis of postoperative thrombotic events in obese patients undergoing orthopedic surgery.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies involving low-molecular-weight heparin for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of low molecular weight heparin, aspirin, and their combination for the prevention of thrombosis after total knee arthroplasty in obese patients.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Measuring anti-factor xa activity to monitor low-molecular-weight heparin in obesity: a critical review.The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative thromboses are among the most feared complications in orthopedic surgery as they may cause life-threatening conditions in otherwise highly successful procedures such as total joint replacement. Body weight is an important risk factor for thromboses and is used in algorithms to determine dosages in prophylaxis. However, weight patterns among orthopedic populations have changed considerably since the introduction of these algorithms, essentially shifting towards obesity. This study asks whether present-day obese patients would benefit from higher than usual dosages of bemiparin in the prophylaxis of postoperative thrombosis. PATIENTS AND
methodsTo detect at least a 5% difference in the incidence of clinically symptomatic thrombotic events with sufficient power, 750 patients were enrolled in the study and treated with 3,500 IU or 5,000 IU bemiparin. Differences in rates were modelled in a Poisson regression including as covariates the potential confounders severity of immobilization, sex, exact weight and age.
resultsOverall, 723 patients were followed for a total of 66.8 person-years and analyzed by intention-to-treat. The ratio of incidence rates in the two groups of patients was 0.35 (95% CI: 0.03-2.91), thus there was no evidence for a difference in rates between groups. There was, however, a borderline significant association between incidence rates and body weight. There were no complications resulting from the higher dosages of bemiparin.
conclusionBoth groups of treated patients showed low incidence rates of thromboses and we did not see a significant reduction of incidence rates with higher dosages of bemiparin in this population. However, there was weak evidence that higher dosages might prove beneficial if populations gain weight even further.
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.