ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2014
Comparative evaluation of efficacy, safety and haemostatic parameters of enoxaparin and fondaparinux in unstable coronary artery disease.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Choosing between Enoxaparin and Fondaparinux for the management of patients with acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2017Pooled it
- Evaluation of Effectiveness and Tolerability of Fondaparinux in the Management of Symptomatic Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Real-World Evidence-Based Study on an Indian Population.Cardiology and therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the safety and efficacy of Enoxaparin (EX) and Fondaparinux (FD) in patients with Unstable Coronary Artery Disease (UCAD). MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective, open label, randomized comparative study was designed to study the comparative efficacy and safety of EX and FD in UCAD patients. Recovery, recurrence, major and minor bleeding and biochemical investigations were evaluated and compared among two arms.
resultsThe baseline demographic characteristics were similar in both groups, with mean age of 56.05 and 56.05 years in EX and FD group respectively. Recovery was equal in two arms. Recurrent MI or angina was seen numerically more in EX group, but it did not statistically vary from that in the FD group. Incidence of haemorrhage was similar in both groups at 9 days, but at 30 days, EX showed a higher incidence (p<0.05). Deaths were prevented in both the treatment arms. Bleeding parameters such as BT, CT and platelet count were not altered in both groups.
conclusionFD appeared to be better than EX in efficacy, as was indicated by a numerically more decrease in recurrence of angina or MI. FD regimen group also had better safety profile, as there was no incidence of haemorrhage at 30 days Therefore, we conclude that FD is an attractive option than EX in UCAD patients.
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.