ReviewCureus2020
Anticoagulation Options for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Induced Coagulopathy.
Review in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nafamostat Mesylate for the Hypercoagulable State of SARS-CoV-2 With Renal Replacement Therapy: A Case Report.Cureus · 2024Article
- COVID-19-Associated Portal Vein Thrombosis Post-Cholecystitis.The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc · 2023Article
- The role of direct oral anticoagulants in the era of COVID-19: are antiviral therapy and pharmacogenetics limiting factors?Croatian medical journal · 2022Article
- Coagulopathy and Fibrinolytic Pathophysiology in COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory roles of vitamins in COVID-19 therapy.European journal of medicinal chemistry · 2022Review
- Anticoagulation Prior to COVID-19 Infection Has No Impact on 6 Months Mortality: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Beneficial Effects of Anticoagulants on the Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19 Patients.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Progressive COVID-19-Associated Coagulopathy Despite Treatment with Therapeutic Anticoagulation and Thrombolysis.The American journal of case reports · 2021Article
- Risk factors for intracerebral hemorrhage in patients with COVID-19.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2021Article
- Fat-Soluble Vitamins and the Current Global Pandemic of COVID-19: Evidence-Based Efficacy from Literature Review.Journal of inflammation research · 2021Review
- A rapid review of recent advances in diagnosis, treatment and vaccination for COVID-19.AIMS public health · 2021Review
- Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Infection.The American journal of medicine · 2021Review
- A 47-Year-Old Hispanic Man Who Developed Cutaneous Vasculitic Lesions and Gangrene of the Toes Following Admission to Hospital with COVID-19 Pneumonia.The American journal of case reports · 2020Article
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
As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is evolving, coagulopathy induced by the disease and its severe complications are raising concerns in the medical community. Because coagulopathy caused by COVID-19 has been difficult to control, it is important to have a better understanding of what therapies have been studied thus far and what therapies have demonstrated better outcomes for hospitalized patients. This review is focused on literature, research, and expert clinical judgments published in 2020 with a few references to articles published earlier. The review introduces the interim guidelines of the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) for management of COVID-19-induced coagulopathy, discusses the efficacy of these guidelines in clinical settings, and summarizes the response of the scientific community to these guidelines and their clinical implications. Due to the failure of patients to respond to the prophylactic doses of heparin recommended by ISTH, higher doses of heparin may be necessary to achieve adequate anticoagulation. Patients' resistance to prophylactic doses of heparin could be due to low levels of anti-thrombin and high levels of fibrinogen, which would reinforce the use of therapeutic doses of heparin in the early stages of hospitalization. The review also compares low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and unfractionated heparin (UFH) as anticoagulant choices for COVID-19 patients. Given the complications specific to COVID-19, UFH may be a better choice of anticoagulant. Outpatient anticoagulation options are also reviewed. Changing qualified patients from vitamin K antagonists (VKA) to direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for the convenience of less frequent monitoring may be appropriate. New anticoagulant, nafamostat, used in Japan is also discussed as a possible potentiate for heparin therapy.
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.