ライフサイエンスコーパス: low-molecular-weight heparin

1 ers), and anticoagulants (unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins).

2 ncluding low-dose unfractionated heparin and low molecular weight heparin.

3 not altered by saturating concentrations of low molecular weight heparin.

4 unfractionated heparin or, less commonly, to low-molecular weight heparin.

5 7.3wt% of heparin and from 6.2 to 8.3wt% of low-molecular-weight heparin.

6 ls that compared unfractionated heparin with low-molecular-weight heparin.

7 ation until, in the 1990s, widespread use of low-molecular-weight heparin.

8 s (97%), of whom 600 (89%) were treated with low-molecular-weight heparin.

9 ral anticoagulants compared with warfarin or low-molecular-weight heparin.

10 analyses examined outpatient treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin.

11 ge interaction to unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin.

12 th direct oral anticoagulants, warfarin, and low-molecular-weight heparin.

13 ral anticoagulants compared with warfarin or low-molecular-weight heparin.

14 ypercoagulable state, which was treated with low-molecular-weight heparin.

15 ng complications compared with bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin.

16 with venous thromboembolism are treated with low-molecular-weight heparins.

17 anticoagulant, is being rapidly displaced by low-molecular-weight heparins.

18 anism of action of the important therapeutic low-molecular-weight heparins.

19 Treatment options include warfarin and low-molecular-weight heparins.

20 use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and low-molecular-weight heparins.

21 eeding complications, the odds ratio favored low-molecular-weight heparins (0.57 [CI, 0.33 to 0.99];

22 vs dabigatran 0.88 [0.59-1.36]; factor Xa vs low-molecular-weight heparin 1.02 [0.42-2.70]; and low-m

23 eceive bridging anticoagulation therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin (100 IU of dalteparin per k

24 lation with warfarin (39%), DOACs (37%), and low-molecular weight heparin (16%) was administered for

25 ptor, by microinjection of single cells with low molecular weight heparin (5-50 mg/ml), blocked only

26 is on day 1 or 2 in hospital, typically with low-molecular weight heparin (56% of patients receiving

27 signed to receive aspirin (6101 patients) or low-molecular-weight heparin (6110 patients).

28 ants were used in 24% (n=665), predominantly low-molecular-weight heparin (73%, n=487) and unfraction

29 fXa to bind direct fXa inhibitors as well as low molecular weight heparin-activated antithrombin III

30 Low-molecular-weight heparins administered subcutaneousl

31 There are developments in the role of low-molecular-weight heparin agents in management of acu

32 ural bridging with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin aims to reduce the risk of

33 ion [PCI], glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, low-molecular-weight heparin; all P<.001).

34 he thermodynamics of SLPI interaction with a low molecular weight heparin, an undersulfated decasacch

35 ective depolymerization to prepare new ultra low molecular weight heparin and coupling it with the or

36 iscusses controversies regarding the role of low molecular weight heparin and intensive statin regime

37 Low molecular weight heparin and the synthetic pentasacc

38 commonly used anti-coagulant drugs, such as low molecular weight heparin and warfarin, are effective

39 oagulant activity of both unfractionated and low molecular weight heparins and inhibited enzymatic su

40 sts for inpatient treatment were $26,516 for low-molecular-weight heparin and $26,361 for unfractiona

41 ding compared with sequential treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin and a vitamin K antagonist

42 Low-molecular-weight heparin and nonsteroidal anti-infla

43 Anticoagulants, primarily low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin, are used to t

44 Low-molecular-weight heparins and heparinoids are superi

45 ommended medications increased, particularly low-molecular-weight heparins and statins.

46 nt anticoagulants such as unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins and the vitamin K antagoni

47 Postdischarge use of low-molecular-weight-heparin and other anticoagulants wa

48 glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, low molecular weight heparins, and coronary stents will

49 ST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Vitamin K antagonists, low-molecular-weight heparin, and direct oral anticoagul

50 Parenteral unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, and fondaparinux are avail

51 ding aspirin, clopidogrel, unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin, and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa

52 ed inefficiently when PF4 was incubated with low-molecular-weight heparin, and none formed with the p

53 Low-molecular-weight heparins appear to be beneficial in

54 Low molecular weight heparins are a new class of anticoa

55 Heparin and the low molecular weight heparins are extensively used as me

56 All of the panels agree that low molecular weight heparins are preferred for the long

57 Vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins are still alternatives to

58 ombin (AT) binding properties of heparin and low molecular weight heparins are strongly associated to

59 ycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors now exist and low molecular weight heparins are used more frequently w

60 Low molecular weight heparins are widely used to try to

61 that compared direct oral anticoagulant with low-molecular-weight heparin are also summarised, along

62 Low-molecular-weight heparins are attractive alternative

63 Low-molecular-weight heparins are effective for treating

64 Low-molecular-weight heparins are highly cost-effective

65 lysis, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition, and low-molecular-weight heparin as adjuncts.

66 roach for the analysis of unfractionated and low molecular weight heparins, as well as porcine and hu

67 d with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and low-molecular-weight heparin at anticoagulant dose.

68 e of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and/or low-molecular-weight heparin before catheterization have

69 d Randomized Control Trial of Post-Operative Low Molecular Weight Heparin Bridging Therapy Versus Pla

70 h full versus prophylactic/intermediate-dose low-molecular-weight heparin bridging.

71 ial care was higher in patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin, but this was partly offset

72 in binding of various glycosaminoglycans and low molecular weight heparins by microscale thermophores

73 hrombotic agents (unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin) can reduce the occurrence

74 edical-surgical critically ill patients, and low-molecular-weight heparin compared with bid unfractio

75 boembolic prophylaxis, cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin compared with that of other

76 Preliminary studies suggest that low molecular weight heparins could have a role in the p

77 In contrast, two low molecular weight heparins currently considered as cl

78 Low-molecular weight heparins demonstrate at least equal

79 dose low molecular weight heparin, high dose low molecular weight heparin did not reduce symptomatic

80 o major advances are IIb/IIIa inhibition and low-molecular-weight heparin, each of which significantl

81 sess whether antithrombotic prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin effectively prevents recurr

82 nt includes rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily and low-molecular-weight heparins (eg, enoxaparin 40 mg once

83 pirin and heparin has been expanded with the low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin and the intraven

84 andards, and an in-depth NMR analysis of the low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin through systemat

85 se of the pentasaccharide, fondaparinux, and low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin.

86 HSQC spectra of GlcNS, fondaparinux, and the low-molecular weight heparin enoxaparin illustrate the p

87 Both heparin and the low-molecular weight heparin enoxaparin significantly in

88 lso detected heparin-based drugs such as the low-molecular-weight heparin enoxaparin (Lovenox) and th

89 pancreatic trypsin inhibitor is enhanced by low molecular weight heparin (enoxaparin).

90 In patients with acute coronary syndrome, low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) both improves

91 In the ESSENCE trial, subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) reduced the 30

92 This was reproducible with low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin; K(i) = 70 +/-

93 r in combination with standard heparin and a low-molecular-weight heparin, enoxaparin, to suppress th

94 We compared a low-molecular-weight heparin, enoxaparin, with unfractio

95 ts did not differ from that with warfarin or low-molecular-weight heparin (factor Xa vs warfarin IRR

96 tPA was constructed by conjugating tPA with low-molecular weight heparin followed by complexation wi

97 r than conventional anticoagulation therapy (low-molecular-weight heparin followed by vitamin K antag

98 nous thromboembolism previously treated with low-molecular weight heparin, fondaparinux, or a vitamin

99 on whether they are antithrombin dependent (low-molecular-weight heparin, fondaparinux) or antithrom

100 eatments included substitution of heparin or low-molecular weight heparin for warfarin (n = 13 [72%])

101 ost patients received a prophylactic dose of low-molecular-weight heparin for a week and aspirin inde

102 oral anticoagulant compared with warfarin or low-molecular-weight heparin for all indications.

103 tal venous thromboembolism to receive either low-molecular-weight heparin for at least 5 days followe

104 ith heparin and then with either warfarin or low-molecular-weight heparin for at least three to six m

105 s of our trials showed that prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin for the 8 days after knee a

106 icoagulants have been recently compared with low-molecular-weight heparin for the management of acute

107 s noninferior to perioperative bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of arter

108 lation would be noninferior to bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of perio

109 dditional clinical trials of edoxaban versus low-molecular-weight heparin for the treatment of venous

110 thromboembolism, and they are comparable to low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis afte

111 Clinical guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis in p

112 Direct oral anticoagulant versus low-molecular-weight heparin for treatment of venous thr

113 The optimal dosing strategy of low-molecular-weight heparins for the treatment of anten

114 fter discharge for 77 (1.5%) patients, and a low-molecular-weight-heparin for 60 (1.2%) patients.

115 ned to receive either a prophylactic dose of low-molecular-weight heparin (for the 8 days after arthr

116 studied the effects of UF-heparin and three low-molecular-weight heparin fractions (medium-molecular

117 a and to the characterization of heparin and low molecular weight heparin from different sources.

118 nts received antithrombotic prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin from surgery to randomizati

119 shown for chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans, low molecular weight heparins, full length heparins, and

120 for benefit with specific treatments such as low-molecular-weight heparins, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inh

121 about the three classes of antithrombotics--low-molecular-weight heparins, GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors, a

122 of 10 431 participants; 4139 included in the low-molecular-weight heparin group and 4139 in the contr

123 58 (4.0%) of 3958 with available data in the low-molecular-weight heparin group compared with 279 (7.

124 the control population and 88 (2.1%) in the low-molecular-weight heparin group, and minor bleeding e

125 roup and 652 (16.6%) of 3937 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group.

126 Over the past few years, low molecular weight heparin has been well established a

127 Low-molecular-weight heparin has a more predictable anti

128 Historically, in patients with cancer, low molecular weight heparins have been preferred for tr

129 Low molecular weight heparins have the potential of bein

130 ant hirudin (parenteral DTI) and enoxaparin (low molecular weight heparin) have been demonstrated to

131 omplications in her 2 pregnancies asks: Will low-molecular-weight heparin help prevent recurrent plac

132 meta-analyses indicate that prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin, heparin, or fondaparinux s

133 Compared with low dose low molecular weight heparin, high dose low molecular we

134 Interventions involving adjusted doses of low molecular weight heparin in combination with aspirin

135 The efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin in the prophylaxis of DVT f

136 ptor for the clearance of unfractionated and low molecular weight heparins in the liver.

137 s consisted of venous compression stockings, low-molecular weight heparin in obese patients, and earl

138 trials have focused on VTE prophylaxis with low-molecular weight heparins in high-risk cancer outpat

139 ead comparison of rivaroxaban with long-term low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with cancer is

140 aparinux demonstrated efficacy compared with low-molecular-weight heparin in randomized clinical tria

141 ageable after administration of prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin in the combination group.

142 the role of antithrombotic prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin in the prevention of recurr

143 Low-molecular-weight heparin (in comparison to unfractio

144 ate the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin, in preventing portal vein

145 For initial treatment, use of low-molecular-weight heparin increased from 77% to 84%,

146 Either (unfractionated) heparin or low molecular weight heparin is an acceptable treatment

147 Low-dose unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin is preferred.

148 Low molecular weight heparin is the preferred initial th

149 Prophylactic use of warfarin or low-molecular weight heparin is not recommended, althoug

150 Low-molecular weight heparin is the preferred drug-based

151 nd placebo-controlled trial on the effect of low-molecular-weight heparin is lacking.

152 One study suggested that low-molecular-weight heparin is more efficacious than un

153 Although monotherapy with low-molecular-weight heparin is recommended in these pat

154 Low-molecular-weight heparin is recommended over warfari

155 Low-molecular-weight heparin is the standard treatment f

156 processes similar to ones used in preparing low-molecular-weight heparins is reported.

157 l calf compression devices and perioperative low molecular weight heparin, is approximately 2%.

158 Enoxaparin, a low-molecular weight heparin, is effective in prevention

159 diate-dose (n=555) or fixed low-dose (n=555) low-molecular-weight heparin (ITT population).

160 ithrombotic treatment (low-dose aspirin plus low-molecular weight heparin [LDA+LMWH]) for obstetric a

161 red its antiallergic activity with that of a low molecular weight heparin (LMW-heparin, fragmin).

162 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and direct thrombin

163 We have used low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as a model for highl

164 experiment evaluated enterally administered low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) combined with sodium

165 The use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) during PCI has been

166 ncer and a first episode of DVT treated with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for 6 months were el

167 The potential of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in anti-angiogenic t

168 to enhance the inhibitory effects of heparin/low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in breast cancer cel

169 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in therapeutic doses

170 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is being tested as a

171 We hypothesized that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is superior to unfra

172 Evidence has suggested that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) might improve surviv

173 When AT was administered in combination with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or if LMWH was admin

174 agulants (DOACs) may be good alternatives to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or vitamin K antagon

175 r V Leiden are often treated with drugs like low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to prevent placental

176 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), derived from hepari

177 anticoagulant functions of both heparin and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), with reduced antige

178 ctivity, heparin affinity, and inhibition by low molecular weight heparin (LMWH).

179 Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH; standard prophylacti

180 Clinically used low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) are anticoagulants

181 asone should receive prophylaxis with either low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or low-dose aspirin.

182 PL) vesicles demonstrated that inhibition by low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) was independent of f

183 He is treated with therapeutic doses of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH), with brief interrup

184 Low-molecular weight heparins (LMWH) prepared by partial

185 mg/kg PO TID), OHEP only (30 mg/kg PO TID), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) (enoxaparin 5 mg/kg

186 Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) along with with vita

187 red with systemic anticoagulation by APC and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) at doses that inhibi

188 We have shown previously that the GAG low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) binds to Abeta40 fib

189 studies have consistently demonstrated that low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) compounds are effect

190 tegies, unfractionated heparin (UFH) and the low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) dalteparin, finding

191 evidence to support the substitution of the low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) enoxaparin for unfra

192 ada, since 2006, involved replacing UFH with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for prophylactic and

193 tients given unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for prophylaxis or t

194 g events and improved survival compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in a large randomize

195 with a higher risk of bleeding compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with GI

196 boprophylaxis with low-dose aspirin (ASA) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with new

197 Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is modestly superior

198 ve studies suggest that: long-term full-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is more effective th

199 A daily injection of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is often prescribed

200 Long-term low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the current stand

201 cular weight dependent, we hypothesized that low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) may have greater pot

202 Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) offers pharmacologic

203 give us new information about the effects of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) on pregnancy complic

204 Use of in-hospital thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or low dose unfracti

205 etween perioperative thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated he

206 pid syndrome (APS) treated with prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) plus low-dose aspiri

207 odology for the quantitation of a commercial low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) preparation (Fragmin

208 s further demonstrated for the analysis of a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) preparation from por

209 partum period is not above a threshold where low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) prophylaxis is clear

210 K antagonist (VKA) throughout pregnancy; 2) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) throughout pregnancy

211 andomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs no LMWH for the p

212 is of randomized controlled trials comparing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs no LMWH in women

213 (UFH), its 16-, 8-, and 6-mer subfractions, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and the pentasaccha

214 nflammatory effects of aspirin, clopidogrel, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), platelet glycoprote

215 e determined and compared with inhibition by low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH).

216 rnatives to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH).

217 d a linear detection of both UFH (15kDa) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH; 6kDa) added to human

218 Although heparin and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) have been widely us

219 s6025 or F2 rs1799963 polymorphism (n = 279; low-molecular-weight heparin [LMWH] treatment during pre

220 ons (medium-molecular-weight heparin [MMWH]; low-molecular-weight heparin [LMWH]; and ultralow-molecu

221 The interaction of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWHep) with the PrP N- or

222 results of recent clinical trials evaluating low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) in the management

223 dings that anticoagulants, in particular the low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), exert an antineop

224 Heparin and low-molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), complex, sulfated

225 To assess the safety and efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for thromboprophyl

226 However, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) have practical and

227 ompared the efficacy and safety of DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) in these patients.

228 Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) possess several po

229 oral vitamin K antagonists and subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs).

230 ly apart from unfractionated heparin include low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs); a pentasaccharide

231 ctin function, and the current switchover to low-molecular weight heparins may come at some loss of t

232 Low-molecular-weight heparins may simplify the managemen

233 Although low-molecular-weight heparin monotherapy has been identi

234 in the presence of either unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparins more potently than factor

235 treated by anticoagulation with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (n = 15) or intravenous hep

236 VTE treatment consisted of subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (n = 5) or intravenous hepa

237 (n=21 162), subcutaneous unfractio--nated or low-molecular-weight heparin (n=10 718), subcutaneous fo

238 This impurity has also contaminated low-molecular-weight heparins obtained by chemical and e

239 Low-molecular-weight heparins offer practical and potent

240 therapy is the cornerstone of therapy, with low molecular weight heparin or newer options such as di

241 Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin or unfractionated heparin i

242 Anticoagulation, typically employing low molecular weight heparin or warfarin, constitutes th

243 Fixed-dose low-molecular-weight heparin or adjusted-dose unfraction

244 ndromes, especially regarding treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin or IIB/IIIA inhibitors.

245 ceived anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin a

246 Failure of standard thromboprophylaxis using low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin i

247 s achieved by subcutaneous administration of low-molecular-weight heparin or with an orally active an

248 aneous injection of dalteparin (5,000 IU), a low molecular weight heparin, or placebo for 1 year.

249 itial treatment with unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or fondaparinux, usually o

250 macologic thromboprophylaxis (e.g., aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or unfractionated heparin)

251 Prophylaxis with aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or warfarin has been shown

252 c compression boots, unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or warfarin.

253 rction to receive either 1 mg of enoxaparin (low-molecular-weight heparin) per kilogram of body weigh

254 bivalirudin monotherapy vs unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin plus optional GPIs (control

255 monotherapy compared with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin plus optional GPIs on 1-yea

256 ic thromboprophylaxis with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin (pneumatic compression grou

257 tributes of unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin: Potent activity against fa

258 eflecting the composition of intact GAGs and low molecular weight heparin preparations.

259 use only the combination of anti-DC-SIGN and low-molecular-weight heparin prevented binding.

260 of reperfusion, anticoagulation therapy with low molecular weight heparin provides a clear additional

261 Compared with unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin reduced rates of pulmonary

262 Compared with unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins reduced mortality rates ov

263 Low-molecular-weight heparin reduces risk of venous thro

264 Although low molecular weight heparin remains the first line in v

265 uation of anticoagulants, dose reduction, or low-molecular-weight heparin replacement.

266 ed for pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis; (4) low molecular weight heparin represents the preferred ag

267 nfractionated heparin (group A), twice daily low-molecular-weight heparin (reviparin) for 1 week (gro

268 the risk was not different between NOACs and low-molecular-weight heparin (RR, 2.13; 95% CI, 0.22-20.

269 For preventing thromboembolic recurrences, low-molecular-weight heparins seemed as effective as unf

270 aluated the efficacy and safety of the ultra-low-molecular-weight heparin semuloparin for prevention

271 idge" with an alternative agent, typically a low-molecular-weight heparin, should be used.

272 repared firstly by entrapping TRAIL into PEG-low molecular weight heparin-taurocholate conjugate (LHT

273 M118 is a novel low-molecular-weight heparin that has been rationally de

274 Furthermore, it has been suggested that low molecular weight heparin therapy may prolong surviva

275 Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin therapy for prevention of P

276 25% less frequently in patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin, this treatment resulted in

277 Blocking endothelial cell activation by the low-molecular-weight heparin tinzaparin was accompanied

278 om 2 randomized, controlled trials comparing low-molecular-weight heparin to coumarin treatment in ca

279 Inpatient low-molecular-weight heparin treatment became cost savin

280 Low-molecular-weight heparin treatment increased quality

281 Low-molecular-weight heparin treatment reduces mortality

282 incremental cost-effectiveness of inpatient low-molecular-weight heparin treatment was $7820 per QAL

283 sion; or (4) received therapeutic dosages of low-molecular weight heparin, unfractionated heparin, or

284 Thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE with low-molecular-weight heparin, unfractionated heparin, or

285 Standard of care (low-molecular-weight heparins, unfractionated heparin, v

286 Therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin, vitamin K antagonists, and

287 lecular-weight heparin 1.02 [0.42-2.70]; and low-molecular-weight heparin vs dabigatran 0.67 [0.20-1.

288 Treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin was cost saving when as few

289 After the prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin was instituted to prevent v

290 Low-molecular-weight heparin was the most commonly presc

291 Low-molecular-weight heparin was used in 88% of the preg

292 h the administration of therapeutic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin, we performed a matched, re

293 f seven porcine intestinal heparins and five low-molecular-weight heparins were analyzed by this meth

294 Finally, we demonstrated that low molecular weight heparin (which binds to thrombin ex

295 egnancy alter the pharmacokinetic profile of low-molecular-weight heparins, which has led to controve

296 Semuloparin is a novel ultra-low-molecular-weight heparin with high antifactor Xa and

297 eive either bivalirudin or unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin with optional glycoprotein

298 ins (unfractionated heparin, heparinoids, or low-molecular-weight heparin) with aspirin or placebo.

299 now prefer full-dose oral Xa inhibitors over low-molecular-weight heparin, with gastrointestinal lesi

300 ibitors, chronic kidney disease, anemia, and low-molecular-weight heparin within 48-hour pre-PCI.

301 Drug Administration (FDA) approved a generic low-molecular-weight heparin without clinical safety or