ArticleClinical interventions in aging2010
A need for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the use of heparins in the elderly.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enoxaparin 20 mg for thromboprophylaxis in severe renal impairment.The Journal of international medical research · 2019Article
- Optimizing the use of anticoagulants (heparins and oral anticoagulants) in the elderly.Drugs & aging · 2013Review
- Use of low-molecular-weight heparins and new anticoagulants in elderly patients with renal impairment.Drugs & aging · 2011Review
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) have been widely studied in pivotal clinical trials or in several meta-analyses. However, the safety and optimal use of LMWHs in high-risk patients such as the very elderly remains uncertain since these patients are usually excluded from clinical trials. In terms of LMWHs in the elderly, the main concerns are renal failure and the risk of accumulation. A clinical approach consisting of a LMWH dose reduction in the elderly should be considered with great caution in terms of efficacy, since it has been tested neither in the treatment of VTE nor in VTE prophylaxis. If monitoring is considered in patients receiving therapeutic dose LMWHs, appropriate target ranges for peak anti-Xa activity levels should be used and so far, no anti-Xa activity-based guidelines have been issued. Moreover, no data support any laboratory monitoring in elderly patients treated with prophylactic dose LMWHs.
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.