ライフサイエンスコーパス: anticoagulation

1 reased with aspirin discontinuation prior to anticoagulation).

2 iuretics, statins, infection prophylaxis and anticoagulation.

3 ion and permanent contraindications for oral anticoagulation.

4 lation may be necessary to raise the rate of anticoagulation.

5 fibrillation, both of which are treated with anticoagulation.

6 cal thrombosis risk factor requiring further anticoagulation.

7 azard of AF and may be preventable with oral anticoagulation.

8 outcomes of patients with BPVT treated with anticoagulation.

9 illation treated with VKAs or qualifying for anticoagulation.

10 rial vessels despite the use of prophylactic anticoagulation.

11 those which occur despite receiving chemical anticoagulation.

12 ercentage of patients using regional citrate anticoagulation.

13 ient care without the additional presence of anticoagulation.

14 us even among patients who received adequate anticoagulation.

15 rombosis, despite 40% receiving prophylactic anticoagulation.

16 ortunity to reduce stroke risk by initiating anticoagulation.

17 d plasma protein drugs that reverse warfarin anticoagulation.

18 tients with confirmed COVID-19 not receiving anticoagulation.

19 ghly procoagulant condition requiring strong anticoagulation.

20 to grow in pediatric patients, and lifelong anticoagulation.

21 lonal antibody fragment, reverses dabigatran anticoagulation.

22 espite a high target and close monitoring of anticoagulation.

23 lines, complicating the decision to initiate anticoagulation.

24 receiving different regimens of prophylactic anticoagulation.

25 ents with atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulation.

26 imarily receiving standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation.

27 both CCS and atrial fibrillation who require anticoagulation.

28 itamin K antagonists in many indications for anticoagulation.

29 ith and without a traditional indication for anticoagulation.

30 bserved, which has become refractory to oral anticoagulation.

31 ing, and patient preference favor indefinite anticoagulation.

32 th new AF and three (0.5%) were initiated on anticoagulation.

33 e primary predictor was timing of initiating anticoagulation (0-3 days, 4-14 days, or >14 days), and

34 most common reason for patients not being on anticoagulation (11.2%).

35 Of patients on anticoagulation, 149 were using warfarin, and 60 were us

36 terquartile range [IQR]: 1.5 to 6 months) of anticoagulation; 21 patients (25%) did not respond to wa

37 .9 vs 69.2 years; men, 55.9% vs 51.3%; prior anticoagulation, 60.5% vs 63.8%; and median ICH volume,

38 here is paucity of evidence on the impact of anticoagulation (AC) after bioprosthetic aortic valve re

39 Outcomes with anticoagulation (AC) are understudied in advanced liver

40 d evidence on the association of in-hospital anticoagulation (AC) with outcomes and postmortem findin

41 Anticoagulation activity is maintained after at least 3

42 lular uptake and seeding, without exhibiting anticoagulation activity.

43 minimise thrombotic risk, intensification of anticoagulation, addition of an antiplatelet agent, adju

44 comparative repeat cerebral CT scan, chronic anticoagulation, administration of fibrinolytic medicati

45 The Initiation of Anticoagulation after Cardioembolic stroke study is a mu

46 Therapeutic anticoagulation after imaging diagnosis of the first thr

47 s without an established indication for oral anticoagulation after successful TAVR to receive rivarox

48 s without an established indication for oral anticoagulation after successful TAVR, a treatment strat

49 Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation (PRAGUE-17

50 (Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation [PRAGUE-17

51 support treatment of specific patients with anticoagulation agents.

52 agulation (n=337) or standard treatment with anticoagulation alone (n=355).

53 ndomized to PCDT with anticoagulation versus anticoagulation alone (No-PCDT) and were followed for 24

54 4 of the 157 patients (21.7%) receiving oral anticoagulation alone and in 54 of the 156 (34.6%) recei

55 curred in 49 patients (31.2%) receiving oral anticoagulation alone and in 71 (45.5%) receiving oral a

56 The roles of anticoagulation alone or with an antiplatelet agent afte

57 iod of 1 month or 1 year was lower with oral anticoagulation alone than with oral anticoagulation plu

58 95% CI, 1.05-1.36; p = 0.006) compared with anticoagulation alone.

59 eding with concomitant therapy compared with anticoagulation alone.

60 d consideration of the benefits and risks of anticoagulation along with patient preference rather tha

61 Dabigatran anticoagulation also prevented AD-related astrogliosis a

62 DVT), a positive d-dimer test after stopping anticoagulation, an antiphospholipid antibody, low risk

63 has several biological activities including anticoagulation and anti-inflammation.

64 Anticoagulation and antiviral agents are standard treatm

65 gulation cascade, and help practitioners use anticoagulation and pro-coagulants appropriately in pati

66 ed adults >=75 years with incident AF in the Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation-

67 a risk, including early and effective use of anticoagulation and strategies to improve brain perfusio

68 risk PE who subsequently deteriorate despite anticoagulation and those with high-risk PE require addi

69 , although most were contraindicated to oral anticoagulation and used only single antiplatelet therap

70 All participants with AF qualified for anticoagulation and were more likely to be male (57.7%);

71 e included treatment with very-low-dose oral anticoagulation, and even its replacement of acetylsalic

72 iratory failure on heparin dose, adequacy of anticoagulation, and safety.

73 longitudinal single-center study (MGH; both anticoagulation- and nonanticoagulation-associated ICH),

74 Anticoagulation appeared to be underutilized but was ass

75 Although perioperative anticoagulation approach was variable, holding warfarin

76 time, occlusive hemostasis, and insufficient anticoagulation are all predictors of RAO.

77 thrombosis cases was confirmed; therapeutic anticoagulation as prophylaxis thereafter to all subsequ

78 pective German-wide studies (RETRACE I + II; anticoagulation-associated ICH only) conducted at 22 par

79 Patients with anticoagulation-associated major bleeding had higher in-

80 For the group of patients not on anticoagulation at baseline assigned to an intervention

81 Anticoagulation at discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]:

82 brillation, and the same proportion had oral anticoagulation at discharge (n = 3,836).

83 ed to assess the relationship among residual anticoagulation at the end of a percutaneous coronary pr

84 enia [< 150 G/L], and preventive or curative anticoagulation) at the time of the biopsy were, respect

85 patients at 30 days, 5 of whom had restarted anticoagulation before the event.

86 In adjusted models, patients started on anticoagulation between 4 and 14 days did not have a low

87 flammatory bowel disease, immunosuppression, anticoagulation, BMI>50 kg/m and age>65 years.

88 wing number are on either oral or parenteral anticoagulation, but the impact of anticoagulation on pa

89 Whether anticoagulation can reduce these phenomena after transca

90 f combining several interventions to improve anticoagulation care.

91 Physicians should consider the risks of anticoagulation carefully for patients with brain metast

92 luded other intracerebral hemorrhage causes, anticoagulation, coagulopathy, or immediate surgery afte

93 ensitivity 95%, specificity 46%) and empiric anticoagulation considered if D-dimer is greater than 5,

94 gs/alcohol concomitantly >=3 in 40% and oral anticoagulation contraindication in 72%.

95 The NCB of anticoagulation decreases with advancing age.

96 Aspirin use prior to anticoagulation did not modify the relationship between

97 C) generation, the observed limited systemic anticoagulation does not fully explain the antithromboti

98 ata do not suggest the use of full-intensity anticoagulation doses unless otherwise clinically indica

99 inform recurrence risk and thus decisions on anticoagulation duration has largely been disappointing.

100 ) and 32 (9.6%), respectively, received oral anticoagulation during the trial.

101 ssages shortly before an appointment with an anticoagulation-eligible but untreated atrial fibrillati

102 simplified acute physiology score (SAPS) II, anticoagulation, embolic agent, hematoma volume and loca

103 For patients without an indication for oral anticoagulation, empirical treatment with dual antiplate

104 A prospective subset of patients not on oral anticoagulation enrolled in the Evolut Low Risk randomiz

105 ety estimates of rivaroxaban versus standard anticoagulation estimates were similar to those in rivar

106 Leveraging these data, we searched for anticoagulation factors across the genome of H. medicina

107 s, we estimate that fully 15 different known anticoagulation factors are utilized by the species, and

108 ed certain anticoagulants, the full range of anticoagulation factors expressed by this species remain

109 s utility is granted by the extremely potent anticoagulation factors that the leech secretes into the

110 screening, and whether they would recommend anticoagulation for a patient with screen-detected AFib.

111 While guidelines recommend anticoagulation for all atrial fibrillation (AF) patient

112 ents undergoing TAVI who were receiving oral anticoagulation for appropriate indications.

113 tailored to the mechanism of stroke, such as anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation and carotid enda

114 terventions, such as carotid endarterectomy, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, and patent fora

115 iagnosis and treatment of endocarditis, oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, and prosthetic

116 ors, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, use of aspirin,

117 ation regarding the optimal target levels of anticoagulation for neonates and infants and lack of sui

118 ompeting risk of death diminishes the NCB of anticoagulation for older patients with AF.

119 ess effectiveness, we measured the change in anticoagulation for patients of intervention providers r

120 The survival rate of rats in the no-anticoagulation group, rTM pretreatment group, and rTM t

121 volume of saline was administered in the no-anticoagulation group.

122 sesophageal echocardiogram received adequate anticoagulation >=3 weeks and another 2 of 13 (15%) had

123 Patients on long-term anticoagulation had a higher risk of ICH (OR 1.49; CI 1.

124 th melanoma, kidney cancer, and on long-term anticoagulation had a higher risk of ICH.

125 Recently, low-dose oral anticoagulation has entered the CAD arena.

126 who do not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation has not been well studied.

127 ognition of VTE risk factors and advances in anticoagulation have facilitated the clinical evaluation

128 ith an LAAO device without the need for oral anticoagulation if pre-procedural transesophageal echoca

129 ugh there is irrefutable evidence supporting anticoagulation in AF in the general population, these d

130 (Trial 1); or blood pressure (BP) control or anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation (AF) (Trial 2).

131 therapy for high vascular risk patients, and anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation.

132 ug/kg, IV), yet without substantial systemic anticoagulation in baboons.

133 Concomitant aspirin and anticoagulation in critically ill surgical patients was

134 rmine the association between age and NCB of anticoagulation in older adults with AF.

135 ational and prospective studies support that anticoagulation in patients with AF may reduce the risk

136 The present review discusses the trials of anticoagulation in patients with ESUS, suggests potentia

137 Deciding when to initiate oral anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fib

138 al management of antiplatelet therapy during anticoagulation in surgical patients.

139 the decision of whether and how to use oral anticoagulation in these patients.

140 mmarize the limited existing data related to anticoagulation in those with concomitant CKD and AF.

141 and did not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive aspirin alon

142 Analyses were stratified by anticoagulation indication and adjusted for comorbiditie

143 found to have significantly higher rates of anticoagulation initiation (18.7% vs 6.4%, p < 0.001) an

144 ith a higher likelihood of PAF detection and anticoagulation initiation after a cryptogenic ischemic

145 required to determine the optimal timing of anticoagulation initiation.

146 Optimal anticoagulation intensity for patients with mechanical v

147 de that randomized trials evaluating optimal anticoagulation intensity in patients with mechanical va

148 Anticoagulation intensity was not measured in the rivaro

149 Anticoagulation is a mainstay of therapy for those with

150 nt of bioprosthetic valve thrombosis (BPVT), anticoagulation is effective, but the long-term outcome

151 mmended, single antiplatelet therapy or oral anticoagulation is frequently used according to the pati

152 Full anticoagulation is indicated if the diagnosis is confirm

153 creening ultrasound or even empiric systemic anticoagulation is indicated.

154 The type of indefinite anticoagulation is of secondary importance.

155 Therefore, tailoring anticoagulation is of utmost importance to decrease the

156 The level of anticoagulation is strongly related to incidence of RAO

157 troke is high in this population, early oral anticoagulation is suspected to increase the risk of pot

158 When VTE is diagnosed, anticoagulation is the backbone of treatment, with more

159 Management of anticoagulation is the mainstay of treatment for the vas

160 he treatment of choice during pregnancy, and anticoagulation (LMWH or vitamin K antagonists [VKAs]) s

161 dations, and outline a practical approach to anticoagulation management of VTE and AF in cancer.

162 r interventions targeting patients declining anticoagulation may be necessary to raise the rate of an

163 It was hypothesized that oral anticoagulation may decrease the risk of stroke recurren

164 Reduced systemic anticoagulation may enhance the risk of thrombosis.

165 rt valve insertion, atrial fibrillation, and anticoagulation medication.

166 sum, these results suggest that prophylactic anticoagulation might attenuate the incidence of VOC.

167 In contrast, anticoagulation (mostly given for atrial fibrillation) d

168 el of 1.0 to 1.40 mg/dL, or systemic heparin anticoagulation (n = 296), which consisted of a target a

169 andomized to receive either regional citrate anticoagulation (n = 300), which consisted of a target i

170 atients with acute proximal DVT to PCDT plus anticoagulation (n=337) or standard treatment with antic

171 dition, guidelines recommend continuing oral anticoagulation (OAC) after ablation for those at risk o

172 They were all successfully treated with oral anticoagulation (OAC) and were able to undergo DCCV afte

173 The impact of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in ESRD patients is uncertain.

174 Effective stroke prevention with oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the cornerstone of the manageme

175 AF) and risk factors for stroke require oral anticoagulation (OAC) to decrease the risk of stroke or

176 Patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulation (OAC) undergoing cardiac catheterization

177 tion markers associated with short-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) versus antiplatelet therapy (APT)

178 of ADP blocker: major surgery, need for oral anticoagulation (OAC), TIMI major bleeding and drug into

179 (TE) in post-LAAEI cases "on" and "off" oral anticoagulation (OAC).

180 had nonvalvular AF; were indicated for oral anticoagulation (OAC); and had a history of bleeding req

181 ble new AF case (NNS-Rx) (i.e., Class-1 oral anticoagulation [OAC] treatment recommendation) in each

182 ds no evidence for an effect of prediagnosis anticoagulation on mortality.

183 arenteral anticoagulation, but the impact of anticoagulation on patient outcomes is unknown.

184 ed whether patients receiving either routine anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy for existing con

185 risk factors (e.g., antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation or coagulation disorders).

186 Participants not on anticoagulation or DAPT before the procedure were consid

187 In patients not already receiving anticoagulation or on DAPT at the time of lower extremit

188 OR = 1.24; 95%CI = 1.05-1.48; p = 0.012) and anticoagulation (OR = 0.19; 95%CI = 0.043-0.84; p = 0.02

189 hypercoagulable state, a contraindication to anticoagulation, or restrictive physiology; (2) with sev

190 the adjusted percent increase in the use of anticoagulation over 6 months was 5.2% versus 7.4%, resp

191 nts (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.92) but not anticoagulation (p = 0.53).

192 In comparison with conventional anticoagulation (parenteral anticoagulants followed by v

193 is and thrombosis, platelet, coagulation and anticoagulation pathways act together to produce fibrin-

194 e emailed providers monthly reports of their anticoagulation percentage relative to peers for atrial

195 ation alone and in 71 (45.5%) receiving oral anticoagulation plus clopidogrel (difference, -14.3 perc

196 and in 54 of the 156 (34.6%) receiving oral anticoagulation plus clopidogrel (risk ratio, 0.63; 95%

197 th oral anticoagulation alone than with oral anticoagulation plus clopidogrel.

198 advanced CKD, where the decision to commence anticoagulation poses a conundrum.

199 receive concomitant aspirin and therapeutic anticoagulation postoperatively, yet the safety of this

200 trol OR 1.05, 97.5% CI 0.96-1.16, p = 0.215; anticoagulation prescribing OR 0.90, 97.5% CI 0.75-1.09,

201 g levels; achievement of recommended BP; and anticoagulation prescribing.

202 early follow-up, the odds of filling an oral anticoagulation prescription a year later were 64% highe

203 day return emergency visits, and 1-year oral anticoagulation prescription fills.

204 B, 49.3 (95% CI, 1.90-96.77), P=0.042]; oral anticoagulation present [B, 44.8 (95% CI, 27.90-61.78),

205 onstrated that chemoprophylaxis, or low-dose anticoagulation, prevents VTE in selected medical inpati

206 In addition to therapeutic anticoagulation, probably less than 10% of patients requ

207 udy does not provide evidence on the optimal anticoagulation protocol for patients undergoing extraco

208 Anticoagulation protocol quality improvement.

209 poreal membrane oxygenation to two different anticoagulation protocols led to a significant differenc

210 al membrane oxygenation to compare different anticoagulation protocols; however, this study does not

211 nts with solid tumours and no indication for anticoagulation published from the inception of each dat

212 mong patients with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation rates increased from 52.7% to 65.2%.

213 atrial fibrillation or other indications for anticoagulation, recent clinical trials have shown the b

214 However, it still remains unproven if anticoagulation reduces cognitive decline and dementia i

215 Prompt therapeutic anticoagulation remains the cornerstone of therapy for b

216 nitially treated (5-21 days) with parenteral anticoagulation, requiring anticoagulation therapy for a

217 onal citrate, compared with systemic heparin anticoagulation, resulted in significantly longer filter

218 Anticoagulation reversal, intensive blood pressure lower

219 erization were divided into three groups: no anticoagulation; rTM pretreatment; rTM treatment at 6 h.

220 Indefinite warfarin anticoagulation should be considered after a confirmed B

221 the diagnosis is confirmed, and therapeutic anticoagulation should be considered for prophylaxis, as

222 Oral-only anticoagulation strategies are now available, using apix

223 al (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) but increased the risk of ma

224 al (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People using Anticoagulation Strategies) demonstrated that dual pathw

225 al (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) randomized 27 395 participan

226 SS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) study.

227 SS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial found clinical benefit

228 SS (Cardiovascular OutcoMes for People using Anticoagulation StrategieS) trial involving 27,395 patie

229 SS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that the combin

230 al (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies), we compared the effects of

231 The optimal anticoagulation strategy in these patients is uncertain.

232 red to reach conclusions about the effect of anticoagulation strategy on mortality.

233 erence in outcomes could be observed with an anticoagulation strategy with either bivalirudin or hepa

234 tentially affecting the decision to initiate anticoagulation, such as infarct size, hemorrhagic trans

235 based on aspirin use in the 7 days prior to anticoagulation, such that a strong association between

236 cript occurred at 10 ng/L and protc from the anticoagulation system at 100 ng/L.

237 amount of heparin needed to achieve a given anticoagulation target during extracorporeal membrane ox

238 ral valve replacement and the constraints of anticoagulation thanks to TMVI may be an attractive opti

239 TAVI who did not have an indication for oral anticoagulation, the incidence of bleeding and the compo

240 ents undergoing TAVI who were receiving oral anticoagulation, the incidence of serious bleeding over

241 s with ICH who continue to require long-term anticoagulation, the interaction of ICH with neurodegene

242 In patients without an indication for anticoagulation, the use of low doses of the factor Xa i

243 : 0.46; 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.93; p = 0.029) and anticoagulation therapy >3 months (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.2

244 e sought to examine this association between anticoagulation therapy and mortality, as well as the in

245 Heparin is an indispensable drug in anticoagulation therapy but with a narrow therapeutic wi

246 ) with parenteral anticoagulation, requiring anticoagulation therapy for at least 3 months.

247 Oral anticoagulation therapy is frequently prescribed to kidn

248 cted thrombolysis (PCDT) in conjunction with anticoagulation therapy is increasingly used with the go

249 Anticoagulation therapy is the cornerstone of VTE treatm

250 ntation of rBELs into pigs in the absence of anticoagulation therapy led to sustained perfusion for t

251 of this study was to quantify the effect of anticoagulation therapy on LVT evolution using sequentia

252 LY trial (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy With Dabigatran Etexilate) (n=11

253 sm and major bleeding were estimated without anticoagulation therapy, and compared with high- and low

254 nt of postoperative AF, such as the need for anticoagulation therapy, require investigation in random

255 that trypsin inhibition, in combination with anticoagulation therapy, synergistically prevented progr

256 ombosis although the patient received proper anticoagulation therapy.

257 with AF for SSE and may be useful in guiding anticoagulation therapy.

258 osis occurred and resolved under aspirin and anticoagulation therapy.

259 th atrial fibrillation not eligible for oral anticoagulation therapy.

260 who did not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation to a rivaroxaban-based antithrombotic st

261 oagulants has renewed interest in the use of anticoagulation to prevent atherosclerotic events.

262 eakthrough thrombosis while on standard oral anticoagulation treatment and its management is a major

263 nterventions have not by themselves improved anticoagulation use in patients with atrial fibrillation

264 everal studies have attempted to investigate anticoagulation use in this population and provided more

265 admitted with major bleeding, pre-admission anticoagulation use was associated with increased hospit

266 Among survivors, anticoagulation use was associated with longer median ho

267 tervention was feasible but did not increase anticoagulation use.

268 n femoral veins were randomized to PCDT with anticoagulation versus anticoagulation alone (No-PCDT) a

269 study of consecutive patients (2014-2019) on anticoagulation versus those without (controls) with reg

270 onsiderations, specifically the selection of anticoagulation vs antiplatelet therapy for secondary pr

271 mmended (4-14 days) time frame to start oral anticoagulation was not associated with reduced ischemic

272 Prophylactic anticoagulation was prescribed in 89.4% of patients with

273 y biomarkers, fatty acid oxidation, and oral anticoagulation were independent factors for predicting

274 ne palmitoyltransferase IB)-protein and oral anticoagulation were independent factors for predicting

275 lizumab, methylprednisolone, and therapeutic anticoagulation were initiated.

276 idelines suggest the use of regional citrate anticoagulation (which involves the addition of a citrat

277 patients without an indication for long-term anticoagulation who had undergone successful TAVR, a riv

278 ical valve replacement necessitates lifelong anticoagulation with a vitamin K antagonist.

279 Procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin (BIV), trans-radial int

280 Long-term anticoagulation with dabigatran inhibited thrombin and t

281 Anticoagulation with dabigatran prevented memory decline

282 This study evaluates whether anticoagulation with dabigatran, a clinically approved o

283 trolled trials comparing early to later oral anticoagulation with DOACs in ischaemic stroke associate

284 In addition, low-dose anticoagulation with either apixaban or rivaroxaban can

285 cestry from the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 (Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial

286 bleeding scales in the ENGAGE AF (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial

287 ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial

288 ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial

289 round The ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial

290 Therapeutic anticoagulation with heparin (target activated partial t

291 iving continuous kidney replacement therapy, anticoagulation with regional citrate, compared with sys

292 Anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin remains the

293 te ischemic stroke, the association of prior anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or dir

294 Lifelong anticoagulation with warfarin or alternative vitamin K a

295 ing in the context of a patient who requires anticoagulation with warfarin.

296 point was the maximum reversal of dabigatran anticoagulation within 4 hours after administration of i

297 Guidelines recommend initiating anticoagulation within 4 to 14 days after cardioembolic

298 ntrol group who did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation within 7 days after injury, pulmonary em

299 east 7 days and did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation within 7 days after injury.

300 t as it holds promise to deliver efficacious anticoagulation without an enhanced risk of major bleeds