SynthesisObesity surgery2026
Prophylactic Enoxaparin Dosing After Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Pharmacodynamic Efficacy and Safety.
Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVenous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality following metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS). Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is widely used for thromboprophylaxis; however, the optimal prophylactic enoxaparin dose in patients with obesity remains uncertain. Anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) activity is commonly used as a surrogate marker of pharmacological efficacy.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered with PROSPERO. PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 31 March 2026. Studies evaluating prophylactic enoxaparin dosing in patients with obesity undergoing MBS, with reported anti-Xa levels, were included. Random-effects meta-analyses compared lower (30-40 mg) versus higher (60 mg) enoxaparin regimens with respect to attainment of prophylactic anti-Xa levels with secondary outcomes including mean anti-Xa activity, VTE and bleeding event rates.
resultsTen studies comprising 1,069 enrolled patients, of whom 1,016 contributed to the primary meta-analysis, met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving prophylactic anti-Xa levels between higher and lower dose regimens (risk ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.91-1.20; I² = 58.2%, p = 0.0104). Higher doses were associated with significantly increased mean anti-Xa levels (mean difference 0.13 IU/mL, 95% CI 0.05-0.21; p = 0.001).
conclusionHigher prophylactic enoxaparin doses increase anti-Xa levels but do not improve attainment of prophylactic targets compared with standard dosing following MBS. In a post-hoc, exploratory, hypothesis-generating subgroup analysis, BMI-adjusted dosing strategies demonstrated comparable pharmacodynamic efficacy to fixed higher doses; this finding is not pre-specified and should not be used to support definitive conclusions. High-quality multicentre randomised trials are required to define optimal thromboprophylaxis strategies in this high-risk population.
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.