ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2026
Unfractionated Heparin and Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Sepsis: Anti-Inflammatory and Anticoagulant Effects Versus No Anticoagulation-A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the controversy surrounding anticoagulation therapy in sepsis, this study evaluated the efficacy of unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) compared with no anticoagulation in sepsis management, considering their potential benefits beyond anticoagulation.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, 1362 sepsis patients were stratified into no anticoagulation, UFH, or LMWH groups. Propensity score matching balanced baseline characteristics. UFH was administered intravenously and LMWH subcutaneously at standard doses. Twenty-two biomarkers were assessed at baseline and days 1, 3, and 7 post-anticoagulation. Survival and bleeding were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Generalized linear mixed models identified treatment-associated biomarkers, and mediation analysis evaluated their role in survival benefit.
resultsAfter matching, 109 and 394 patients were included in the UFH and LMWH comparisons, respectively. Both UFH and LMWH were associated with significantly improved survival versus the no anticoagulation group (p < 0.001), without increased 90-day bleeding risk. UFH was associated with significant reductions in FDP, D-dimer, IL-6, IL-8, and CRP (FDR-adjusted p < 0.001), whereas LMWH was associated with significant reductions only in FDP and D-dimer. Mediation analysis demonstrated that UFH's survival benefit was partly mediated by IL-6 and IL-8 reduction, accounting for 30.9% (p = 0.012) and 29.6% (p = 0.045) of the total effect. LMWH's survival benefit was not significantly mediated by any measured biomarker.
conclusionsBoth UFH and LMWH improved survival in sepsis patients without increasing bleeding risk. However, UFH demonstrated broader anti-inflammatory effects, with survival benefit partially explained by IL-6/IL-8 suppression. LMWH's benefit appeared primarily anticoagulant-mediated.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2100045167. Registered 06 April 2021, retrospectively registered.
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.