SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2012
Efficacy and safety of enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03145675 (Optimizing the Anticoagulation Regimen of Enoxaparin During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), which is not on this map. Cited by 49 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Optimizing the Anticoagulation Regimen of Enoxaparin During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Who cites it
49 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 218 citations in OpenAlex.
- CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in 2024.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2024Guideline
- Clinical Practice Guideline of Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine for Acute Myocardial Infarction.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2020Guideline
- CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 2018.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2018Guideline
- Pooled it
- Administration of low molecular weight and unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention.Indian heart journalPooled it
- Postprocedural Anticoagulation After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: 1-Year Results From the RIGHT Trial and Meta-analyses.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in 2026.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Antithrombotic therapy in complex percutaneous coronary intervention.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Review
- [Management of acute coronary syndrome].Herz · 2025Review
- Short-term outcomes of unfractionated heparin vs. low molecular weight heparin in trans-radial coronary angiography: a comparative study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Approach to large thrombus burden in ST-elevation myocardial infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Current Antithrombotic Treatments for Cardiovascular Diseases: A Comprehensive Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- From Atherosclerotic Plaque to Myocardial Infarction-The Leading Cause of Coronary Artery Occlusion.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Effectiveness, Safety, and Costs of Thromboprophylaxis with Enoxaparin or Unfractionated Heparin Among Medical Inpatients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease or Heart Failure.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2024Article
- Intra-abdominal hematomas and identifiable risk factors in patients receiving subcutaneous enoxaparin.PloS one · 2024Article
- Therapeutic inefficacy of protocol driven intravenous unfractionated heparin infusion in the current era.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2023Article
- Factors associated with bleeding events from enoxaparin used for patients with acute coronary syndrome.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
- An empirical evaluation of the impact scenario of pooling bodies of evidence from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in medical research.BMC medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluating agreement between bodies of evidence from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in medical research: a meta-epidemiological study.BMC medicine · 2022Article
- Bleeding avoidance strategies in percutaneous coronary intervention.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the efficacy and safety of enoxaparin compared with unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline and Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 1996 to May 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised and non-randomised studies comparing enoxaparin with unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention and reporting on both mortality (efficacy end point) and major bleeding (safety end point) outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Sample size, characteristics, and outcomes, extracted independently and analysed. DATA SYNTHESIS: 23 trials representing 30,966 patients were identified, including 10,243 patients (33.1%) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction, 8750 (28.2%) undergoing secondary percutaneous coronary intervention after fibrinolysis, and 11,973 (38.7%) with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome or stable patients scheduled for percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 13,943 patients (45.0%) received enoxaparin and 17,023 (55.0%) unfractionated heparin. Enoxaparin was associated with significant reductions in death (relative risk 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.76; P<0.001), the composite of death or myocardial infarction (0.68, 0.57 to 0.81; P<0.001), and complications of myocardial infarction (0.75, 0.6 to 0.85; P<0.001), and a reduction in incidence of major bleeding (0.80, 0.68 to 0.95; P=0.009). In patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention, the reduction in death (0.52, 0.42 to 0.64; P<0.001) was particularly significant and associated with a reduction in major bleeding (0.72, 0.56 to 0.93; P=0.01).
conclusionEnoxaparin seems to be superior to unfractionated heparin in reducing mortality and bleeding outcomes during percutaneous coronary intervention and particularly in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction.
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.