Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0034065 (pulmonary embolism)
 14,979 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily subcutaneous injection of dalteparin, a low molecular weight heparin, with that of intravenous unfractionated heparin in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Patients were included if they had deep venous thrombosis distal to inguinal ligament and were randomised either before, if it was considered necessary, or after phlebographic verification of the diagnosis. There was no pre-inclusion treatment with unfractionated heparin. One hundred and twenty patients received dalteparin, administered subcutaneously once-daily at a fixed dose of 200 IU anti-factor Xa/kg, and 133 patients received a continuous intravenous infusion of unfractionated heparin (UFH). Oral anticoagulation was started on the first or second day, and initial treatment with dalteparin or UFH discontinued when the prothrombin time was in the therapeutic range (2 < INR < 3) on two consecutive days. Control phlebograms were taken within 4 days, thereafter. There were no significant differences between the two initial treatment groups in improvements in Marder score. Two major bleeding events occurred in the UFH group versus none in the dalteparin group. One patient in each group experienced clinically significant pulmonary embolism. During a mean follow-up period of 6.9 +/- 1.5 months, recurrent DVT occurred in four patients in the dalteparin group and in two of the UFH group. These results confirm those of a previous study on dalteparin in the initial treatment of DVT, and suggest that dalteparin administered once-daily at a fixed dose of 200 UI/kg is as effective and well-tolerated as UFH in patients with DVT below the inguinal ligament. The present study also demonstrates that dalteparin can be started as soon as the diagnosis of DVT is suspected and without pre-treatment with UFH. Given that the administration of once-daily subcutaneous injections needs not require a patient to be hospitalised, studies to investigate the possibility of using dalteparin for the initial treatment of DVT in the outpatient setting are warranted.
 ...
PMID:Once-daily subcutaneous dalteparin, a low molecular weight heparin, for the initial treatment of acute deep vein thrombosis. 886 30

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.
 ...
PMID:Nadroparin calcium. A review of its pharmacology and clinical use in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders. 910 90

Several new drugs for the management of thromboembolic disorders have recently become available. Low-molecular-weight heparins are being evaluated for the prophylaxis of medical and surgical deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism; for the treatment of pre-existing thrombosis; and for cases of coronary syndrome (unstable angina, myocardial infarction), thrombotic and ischemic stroke, interventional cardiology, pregnancy, cancer, and transplantation-associated thrombosis. A chemically synthesized heparin pentasaccharide, which has purely anti-factor Xa activity and does not induce thrombocytopenia, is also in clinical trial. Thrombin inhibitors, such as hirudin and argatroban, are a practical anticoagulant substitute where heparin cannot be used. They are also useful for the management of coronary syndrome and as adjunct therapy. The antiplatelet agent ticlopidine and its analogue, clopidogrel, which does not produce blood dyscrasia, are effective for the secondary prevention of thrombotic stroke and the management of combined arterial thrombotic syndromes. Glycoprotein-targeting antibodies, synthetic derivatives, and peptides (some of which are orally bioavailable) have added a new dimension to the management of arterial thrombosis and high-risk patients having angioplasty. Plasma-derived agents, such as antithrombin III, are available for the management of thrombophilia and disseminated intravascular coagulation. Compression devices and the foot pump, alone and in combination with pharmacologic agents, have been used successfully. Combination therapy using various agents in different proportions have also been found useful. Although there is much enthusiasm in this quickly developing area and clinical trials are demonstrating the antithrombotic efficacy of the new drugs, safety considerations require additional clinical validation. Long-term outcomes and costs also need to be addressed objectively.
 ...
PMID:Current status on new anticoagulant and antithrombotic drugs and devices. 926 11

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a major orthopaedic procedure with a high risk of postoperative thromboembolism. Increasing demand for this type of surgery, together with its high cost, has led to examination of means by which the cost of THA may be minimised. Current clinical opinion favours the use of suitable pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing THA; such prophylaxis may be provided with subcutaneous standard unfractionated heparin (UFH), oral warfarin or subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Traditionally, LMWHs have been perceived as being more expensive to use than UFH or warfarin because of their relatively high acquisition cost. However, recent pharmacoeconomic data have shown that cost savings are possible when LMWHs are used. This is attributed mainly to reduced frequency of administration, reductions in costs associated with diagnosis and treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), and the lack of need for laboratory monitoring of blood coagulation parameters. LMWHs have proportionally less anti-factor IIa (antithrombin) activity relative to anti-factor Xa activity than UFH. Enoxaparin, a LMWH with a mean molecular weight of 4 to 5kD, is reported to have approximately 5 times less activity against thrombin than UFH, for equivalent anti-factor Xa activity. Randomised clinical trials in patients undergoing THA have shown enoxaparin to be at least as effective as UFH in the prevention of DVT and PE, with consistent trends towards a lower incidence of DVT with enoxaparin than with UFH. Similar rates of haemorrhagic complications were reported for enoxaparin and UFH in most trials, although a significantly higher total transfusion requirement was reported for UFH than for enoxaparin in a double-blind study. A significantly higher incidence of bleeding was observed with UFH than with enoxaparin in another study, with similar transfusion requirements for both treatment groups. Cost comparisons in which costs were assigned retrospectively to clinical data have shown cost advantages for LMWHs in general over UFH when costs of administration, hospital bed occupancy and laboratory/radiology procedures are calculated. Cost savings with LMWHs were attributed mainly to reductions in the cost of managing thromboembolic complications in patients receiving these drugs. One meta-analysis showed a saving of $US50 000 (1993 figures) for LMWH over UFH (both subcutaneously twice daily) for every 1000 patients. Subcutaneous enoxaparin at a dosage of 30mg twice daily was shown to be more cost effective than oral warfarin in the prophylaxis of DVT and PE in 2 North American studies in which costs were related to outcomes. One study comprised the application of a decision analysis to a hypothetical group of 10 000 patients; an incremental cost effectiveness of $US12 288 (1993 figures) per death averted was reported for enoxaparin. Enoxaparin was also associated with an overall incremental cost effectiveness of $Can29 140 (1992 figures) per year of life saved (YLS) in the other study, in which costs were applied to clinical data obtained retrospectively from 10 randomised trials. Although no cost-effectiveness analyses have been carried out to compare enoxaparin with UFH, a UK cost comparison reported an overall cost saving of pounds 20 per patient (figures from 1989 to 1990) with enoxaparin 40mg once daily subcutaneously over subcutaneous UFH 5000IU 3 times daily. It has also been suggested that the use of once- or twice-daily enoxaparin in preference to UFH may reduce the overall length of hospital stay; a significant difference emerged in 1 analysis (9.9 or 9.5 vs 11.3 days). Pharmacoeconomic data therefore support the use of enoxaparin as an effective thromboprophylactic treatment with potential cost advantages over warfarin and UFH. Cost-effecti
 ...
PMID:Enoxaparin. A pharmacoeconomic appraisal of its use in thromboembolic prophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty. 1016 20

Deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism are among the most common complications of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), an antibody-mediated adverse effect of heparin that leads paradoxically to in vivo activation of platelets and the coagulation system. Inappropriate treatment of HIT-associated DVT with warfarin can cause the DVT to progress to limb gangrene: this results from impaired ability of the protein C natural anticoagulant pathway to down-regulate thrombin generation, thus leading to microvascular thrombosis and tissue necrosis. Appreciation of the importance of coagulation system activation in HIT provides a rationale for treatments that reduce thrombin generation, either via inhibiting factor Xa (danaparoid) or via inhibiting thrombin directly (lepirudin). Clinicians should know how to distinguish HIT from other thrombocytopenic disorders: for example, thrombocytopenia associated with pulmonary embolism can mimic HIT (pseudo-HIT), and acute dyspnea that can mimic acute pulmonary embolism can result from acute in vivo platelet activation in a patient with HIT antibodies who receives heparin bolus therapy (pseudo-pulmonary embolism).
 ...
PMID:Venous thromboembolism in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. 1091 44

Venous thromboembolism is a common complication in patients with cancer. The management of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism can be a considerable challenge in patients with cancer. The cancer itself and associated treatments contribute to an ongoing thrombogenic stimulus, while cancer patients are thought to be at increased risk for anticoagulant-induced bleeding. Initial treatment of acute thromboembolism is with intravenous unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin. Treatment at home with low molecular weight heparin is an attractive option in patients with malignant disease. Long-term treatment of acute venous thromboembolism has traditionally been with oral anticoagulants. However, the inconvenience and narrow therapeutic window of oral anticoagulants make such therapy unattractive and problematic in cancer patients. Low molecular weight heparins are being evaluated as an alternative for long-term therapy because their anticoagulant effects are more predictable and laboratory monitoring is unnecessary. Although many clinical issues remain unresolved in the treatment of cancer patients with venous thromboembolism, the future holds much promise as new antithrombotic agents, including factor Xa antagonists and oral thrombin inhibitors, are being tested in clinical trials.
 ...
PMID:Treatment of venous thrombosis in the cancer patient. 1154 81

Reviparin sodium (Clivarine), Knoll AG) is a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with a mean peak molecular weight of 3900 Da. It is characterised by a narrow molecular weight distribution profile, with an anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa):anti-factor IIa (anti-IIa) ratio of >or=3.6. In healthy human volunteers, plasma anti-Xa activity was up to five times higher and lasted three times longer with reviparin compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH). Unlike UFH, reviparin has negligible effects on global clotting tests. Reviparin has been shown to be as effective as UFH in different prophylactic indications and causes fewer injection-site haematomas. At a daily dose of 1750 IU anti-Xa it was as effective as UFH in preventing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in moderate risk surgery (general and abdominal) and significantly reduced DVT in patients with brace immobilisation of the legs. At a daily dose of 4200 IU anti-Xa reviparin was as effective as UFH or enoxaparin in preventing DVT in high risk orthopaedic surgery and as effective as UFH in prevention of DVT and/or pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or mortality in high risk orthopaedic surgery. In patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), reviparin was more effective than UFH in thrombus reduction and at least as effective as UFH in the prevention of clinical recurrence of DVT and/or PE. The use of reviparin is associated with a similar or lower incidence of bleeding complications than UFH.
 ...
PMID:Reviparin sodium - a new low molecular weight heparin. 1182 31

Antithrombotic therapy with unfractionated heparin (UFH) and warfarin for the treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) became widely accepted in the early 1960s. Subsequent clinical trials have focused on the importance of early intravenous UFH in the treatment of venous thromboembolic events, the method of heparin administration, the importance of rapid anticoagulation to prevent recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), and the optimal duration of UFH administration. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) represents a significant advance over UFH therapy for VTE. Developed in the late 1980s, LMWH has become an excellent alternative to UFH because it offers superior efficacy and safety, improved pharmacokinetics, longer half-life, and once- or twice-daily subcutaneous administration without the need for laboratory monitoring. Fondaparinux is the first of a new class of antithrombotic agents that targets factor Xa. Based on studies of the heparin binding site of antithrombin, this novel pentasaccharide has superior pharmacokinetics and bioavailability when compared with LMWH and can be administered once daily. Studies in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery and in those with proximal DVT indicate that the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux may represent an improvement over those of LMWH.
 ...
PMID:Treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism: improving outcomes. 1207 79

The chemistry, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, dosage and administration, adverse effects, and therapeutic role of tinzaparin are reviewed. Tinzaparin is a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) with antithrombotic properties. It has FDA-approved labeling for use in the treatment of acute symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) with or without pulmonary embolism (PE) when administered in conjunction with warfarin sodium. Tinzaparin works by inhibiting reactions that lead to the clotting of blood. The much-improved pharmacokinetics of tinzaparin compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH) are due to its lower affinity for heparin-binding proteins and endothelial cells, shorter fractionated heparin chain (which allows for better bioavailability), and unsaturable renal elimination. Clinical trials have demonstrated that tinzaparin is at least as safe and effective as UFH for the treatment of DVT. Tinzaparin may also be effective for unlabeled uses, such as prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after orthopedic, general, and abdominal surgery, although more data are needed to define the optimal dose for this indication. The recommended dosage of tinzaparin for the treatment of established DVT with or without PE is 175 anti-factor Xa IU per kilogram of body weight administered subcutaneously once daily for at least six days until the patient achieves adequate anticoagulation with warfarin. As with other LMWHs, the most common complication of tinzaparin therapy is bleeding. Tinzaparin offers an additional treatment option for VTE.
 ...
PMID:Tinzaparin sodium: a low-molecular-weight heparin. 1216 42

Venous thromboembolism, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, represents a significant source of morbidity and mortality in the United States and worldwide. The pharmacologic management of venous thromboembolic disease has witnessed significant advances since oral anticoagulant and heparin therapies began to gain widespread use more than 50 years ago. Cumulative clinical experience gained from using these 2 classes of antithrombotic agents for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism in high-risk patients pointed to a number of efficacy and safety limitations. This prompted further research and the eventual introduction, in the 1980s, of low-molecular-weight heparin(s) as a potentially superior therapeutic modality. Within the last decade the pace of development of newer classes of antithrombotic agents for venous thromboembolism prevention and treatment (as well as other indications) has accelerated. Among agents at late stages of investigation are ximelagatran (a direct thrombin inhibitor), nematode anticoagulant peptide c2 (a tissue factor VIIa inhibitor), and sodium N-[8(2-hydroxylbenzoyl)amino]caprylate (SNAC)/heparin (a heparin derivative). The most recently approved agents for venous thromboembolism indications include the heparinoid, danaparoid sodium, and the newly introduced selective factor Xa inhibitor, fondaparinux.
 ...
PMID:Management of venous thromboembolism: past, present, and future. 1269 66


<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next >>