1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(99)00582-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Usefulness of intravenous enoxaparin for percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina pectoris

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

3
47
0
1

Year Published

2003
2003
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
3
47
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…There are, however, limitations for the use of UFH; thus, other anticoagulants have been investigated, especially in adults undergoing coronary intervention. 619 In a pediatric study by Roschitz et al, 620 40 children received a 100 U/kg body weight bolus of UFH, administered after arterial or venous access, and 25 children were treated with 1 to 1.6 mg/kg enoxaparin subcutaneously. The prophylactic levels of anti-FXa activity were achieved in all patients at the end of catheterization.…”
Section: Thromboprophylaxis For Arterial and Venous Thrombosismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are, however, limitations for the use of UFH; thus, other anticoagulants have been investigated, especially in adults undergoing coronary intervention. 619 In a pediatric study by Roschitz et al, 620 40 children received a 100 U/kg body weight bolus of UFH, administered after arterial or venous access, and 25 children were treated with 1 to 1.6 mg/kg enoxaparin subcutaneously. The prophylactic levels of anti-FXa activity were achieved in all patients at the end of catheterization.…”
Section: Thromboprophylaxis For Arterial and Venous Thrombosismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These and other studies have also established the safety of upstream and periprocedural, subcutaneous enoxaparin as the primary antithrombotic agent for PCI in patients with non-ST elevation ACS (7)(8)(9). In the setting of elective PCI, intravenous enoxaparin also appears to be safe and efficacious (7,10,11). A pivotal trial comparing intravenous enoxaparin with UFH for elective PCI (the Safety and Efficacy of Enoxaparin in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (12,13).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[2][3][4][5] There are not many studies on the effects and safety of LMWH during PCI, although it is known that LMWH are superior to UFH. [8][9][10][11] However, as mentioned above, because accurate measurement of anticoagulation is required and the anticoagulation state can be simply reflected by activated clotting time (ACT) measurement, LMWH use is still limited in many coronary laboratories, and furthermore, guidelines currently do not exist.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[3][4][5][6][7] Although there have been few studies on the therapeutic efficacy and safety of LMWH during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it is known that the effect of LMWH is superior to that of UFH due to no intrinsic platelet activation and aggregation, and the favorable clinical results obtained. [8][9][10][11] Also, it is known that LMWH has a more effective and stable anticoagulation effect than UFH. The major reason is the superior bioavailability, and the minor causes are the decrease in nonspecific protein binding, and decreases in the responsiveness for neutralization by platelet factor 4 and easy control of release of von Willebrand factor.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%