You are in the accessibility menu

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/74911
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorYoshida, Ricardo de Alvarenga-
dc.contributor.authorYoshida, Winston Bonetti-
dc.contributor.authorMaffei, Francisco Humberto de Abreu-
dc.contributor.authorEl Dib, Regina-
dc.contributor.authorNunes, Rogério-
dc.contributor.authorRollo, Hamilton Almeida-
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T11:28:44Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-25T18:45:58Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-27T11:28:44Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-25T18:45:58Z-
dc.date.issued2013-04-01-
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2012.06.010-
dc.identifier.citationAnnals of Vascular Surgery, v. 27, n. 3, p. 355-369, 2013.-
dc.identifier.issn0890-5096-
dc.identifier.issn1615-5947-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/74911-
dc.identifier.urihttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/74911-
dc.description.abstractBackground: In the past 10 years, new anticoagulants (NACs) have been studied for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Objective: To evaluate the risk/benefit profile of NACs versus enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgery. Methods: A systematic review of double-blind randomized phase III studies was performed. The search strategy was run from 2000 to 2011 in the main medical electronic databases in any language. Independent extraction of articles was performed by 2 authors using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators. Results: Fifteen published clinical trials evaluating fondaparinux, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban were included. Primary efficacy (any deep vein thrombosis [DVT], nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or all-cause mortality) favored fondaparinux (relative risk [RR] 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39, 0.63) and rivaroxaban (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.34, 0.73) over enoxaparin, although significant heterogeneity was observed in both series. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 220 mg, apixaban, and bemiparin were similar, with RRs of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.86, 1.20), 0.63 (95% CI, 0.39, 1.01), and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.65, 1.17), respectively. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 150 mg (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03, 1.41), was inferior to enoxaparin. The incidence of proximal DVT favored apixaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0.75) only. Rivaroxaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0,77) and apixaban (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.90) produced significantly lower frequencies of symptomatic DVT. The incidence of major VTE favored rivaroxaban (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.25, 0.81), only. Bleeding risk was similar for all NACs, except fondaparinux (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.55), which exhibited a significantly higher any-bleeding risk compared with enoxaparin, and apixaban (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99), which was associated with a reduced risk of any bleeding. Alanine amino transferase was significantly lower with 220 mg of dabigatran, (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99) than with enoxaparin. Conclusions: NACs can be considered alternatives to conventional thromboprophylaxis regimens in patients undergoing elective major orthopedic surgery, depending on clinical characteristics and cost-effectiveness. The knowledge of some differences concerning efficacy or safety profile, pointed out in this systematic review, along with the respective limitations, may be useful in clinical practice. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.en
dc.format.extent355-369-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.sourceScopus-
dc.subjectalanine aminotransferase-
dc.subjectanticoagulant agent-
dc.subjectapixaban-
dc.subjectbemiparin-
dc.subjectdabigatran-
dc.subjectenoxaparin-
dc.subjectfondaparinux-
dc.subjectrivaroxaban-
dc.subjectalanine aminotransferase blood level-
dc.subjectbibliographic database-
dc.subjectbleeding-
dc.subjectclinical trial (topic)-
dc.subjectdeep vein thrombosis-
dc.subjectdrug efficacy-
dc.subjectdrug safety-
dc.subjectdrug tolerability-
dc.subjectelectronic medical record-
dc.subjectEmbase-
dc.subjecthuman-
dc.subjectlow drug dose-
dc.subjectlung embolism-
dc.subjectMedline-
dc.subjectmeta analysis-
dc.subjectmortality-
dc.subjectorthopedic surgery-
dc.subjectphase 3 clinical trial (topic)-
dc.subjectpriority journal-
dc.subjectrandomized controlled trial (topic)-
dc.subjectreview-
dc.subjectrisk benefit analysis-
dc.subjectrisk factor-
dc.subjectrisk reduction-
dc.subjectside effect-
dc.subjectsurgical risk-
dc.subjectsymptom-
dc.subjectsystematic review-
dc.subjectvenous thromboembolism-
dc.subjectAged-
dc.subjectAnticoagulants-
dc.subjectClinical Trials, Phase III as Topic-
dc.subjectEnoxaparin-
dc.subjectEvidence-Based Medicine-
dc.subjectHemorrhage-
dc.subjectHumans-
dc.subjectMiddle Aged-
dc.subjectOdds Ratio-
dc.subjectOrthopedic Procedures-
dc.subjectPatient Selection-
dc.subjectRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic-
dc.subjectRisk Assessment-
dc.subjectRisk Factors-
dc.subjectSurgical Procedures, Elective-
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome-
dc.subjectVenous Thromboembolism-
dc.titleSystematic review of randomized controlled trials of new anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgeries, compared with enoxaparinen
dc.typeoutro-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)-
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Surgery and Orthopedics Botucatu School of Medicine Paulista State University, Botucatu, São Paulo-
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Surgery and Orthopedics Botucatu School of Medicine Paulista State University, Botucatu, São Paulo-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.avsg.2012.06.010-
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000316646700013-
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso restrito-
dc.relation.ispartofAnnals of Vascular Surgery-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84875228265-
Appears in Collections:Artigos, TCCs, Teses e Dissertações da Unesp

There are no files associated with this item.
 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.