Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38810964›Full record

ReviewSeminars in thrombosis and hemostasis2024

Pleiotropic Effects of Heparin and its Monitoring in the Clinical Practice.

Deepa J Arachchillage, Steve Kitchen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Deepa J ArachchillageCentre for Haematology, Department of Immunology and Inflammation, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Steve KitchenDepartment of Coagulation, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, United Kingdom.

Funding

MRC, United Kingdom MR/V037633/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unfractionated heparin (UFH) was uncovered in 1916, has been used as an anticoagulant since 1935, and has been listed in the World Health Organization's Model List of Essential Medicines. Despite the availability of many other anticoagulants, the use of heparin (either low molecular weight heparin [LMWH] or UFH) is still substantial. Heparin has pleotropic effects including anticoagulant and several nonanticoagulant properties such as antiproliferative, anti-inflammatory activity, and anticomplement effects. Although UFH has been widely replaced by LMWH, UFH is still the preferred anticoagulant of choice for patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass surgery, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and patients with high-risk mechanical cardiac valves requiring temporary bridging with a parenteral anticoagulant. UFH is a highly negatively charged molecule and binds many positively charged molecules, hence has unpredictable pharmacokinetics, and variable anticoagulant effect on an individual patient basis. Therefore, anticoagulant effects of UFH may not be proportional to the dose of UFH given to any individual patient. In this review, we discuss the anticoagulant and nonanticoagulant activities of UFH, differences between UFH and LMWH, when to use UFH, different methods of monitoring the anticoagulant effects of UFH (including activated partial thromboplastin time, heparin anti-Xa activity level, and activated clotting time), while discussing pros and cons related to each method and comparison of clinical outcomes in patients treated with UFH monitored with different methods based on available evidence.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsHeparinDrug MonitoringHeparin, Low-Molecular-WeightHumansAnticoagulantsHeparinHeparin, Low-Molecular-Weight

Identifiers

PMID38810964
PMCPMC11469917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.