Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9108990›Full record

ReviewDrugs & aging1997

Nadroparin calcium. A review of its pharmacology and clinical use in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders.

R Davis, D Faulds

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs & aging, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Postoperative nadroparin administration for prophylaxis of thromboembolic events is not associated with an increased risk of hemorrhage after spinal surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2004
    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.

R DavisAdis International Limited, Auckland, New Zealand. demail@adis.co.nz
D Faulds

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nadroparin (nadroparin calcium) is a low molecular weight heparin with a mean molecular weight of 4.5 kD. Compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH), nadroparin has a greater ratio of anti-factor Xa to anti-factor Ha activity, greater bioavailability and a longer duration of action, allowing it to be administered by subcutaneous injection for prophylaxis or treatment of thromboembolic disorders. In clinical trials conducted in older patients (mean age usually > 60 years), nadroparin was at least as effective as UFH in preventing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism after major general or orthopaedic surgery, and in bedridden medical patients. Nadroparin was also at least as effective as dalteparin or oral acenocoumarol in preventing thromboembolic events following general and orthopaedic surgery, respectively. When used for treatment of established DVT, nadroparin was at least as effective as intravenous UFH. Subcutaneous nadroparin, at dosages similar to those used for the treatment of DVT, produced promising results in older patients with pulmonary embolism, acute ischaemic stroke or unstable angina. In 1 study, 75% of nadroparin-treated patients were able to complete their treatment at home and 36% did not require admission to hospital; the potential pharmacoeconomic implications of these results deserve further evaluation. Overall treatment costs (drug acquisition and monitoring costs) were similar for nadroparin and UFH in a French study, but nadroparin was associated with significantly less nursing time spent on treatment delivery. Nadroparin is well tolerated by older patients. The most frequently reported adverse events in a large (n approximately 4500) placebo-controlled study in general surgical patients were wound and injection site haematoma (11.8 and 10.2%, respectively, vs approximately 6.5% for placebo). When used as prophylaxis, no significant differences in bleeding complications were noted between nadroparin and UFH or acenocoumarol recipients. Prophylactic nadroparin was associated with significantly fewer withdrawals because of adverse events than UFH in elderly bedridden medical patients. When used as treatment for DVT, nadroparin was generally associated with lower occurrences of major bleeding than intravenous UFH (0.5 to 2.3% vs 2 to 5%); however, trials were not large enough to demonstrate any significant differences between the 2 agents. Similarly, the incidence of thrombocytopenia was slightly, but generally not significantly, lower in nadroparin (< 1%) than in UFH (< or = 3.5%) recipients. Thus, nadroparin should be considered an effective and well tolerated alternative to UFH for prophylaxis and treatment of DVT in older patients, with the advantage of more convenient administration and decreased monitoring requirements.

Indexed as

AbsorptionAgingAnticoagulantsChemical FractionationCost-Benefit AnalysisDose-Response Relationship, DrugFibrinolytic AgentsHumansInjections, SubcutaneousKidney DiseasesNadroparinPostoperative ComplicationsThromboembolismTissue DistributionAnticoagulantsFibrinolytic AgentsNadroparin

Identifiers

PMID9108990
OpenAlexW1985803680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.