Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

44 questions · 45 findings · 4 reviews

No studies found 6 · 13.3%GRADE not reported 3 · 6.7%Very low 16 · 35.6%Low 5 · 11.1%Moderate 15 · 33.3%High 0 · 0%

LMWH prophylaxis vs UFH

Adverse events (Re‐operation for bleeding (reoperation for major bleeding within 30 days (yes/no))) · People with cancer with perioperative thromboprophylaxis

LMWH prophylaxis showed no clear difference in reoperation for bleeding compared with UFH prophylaxis (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ASA + high‐dose LMWH vs ASA + low‐dose LMWH or UFH

Subcutaneous bruises · people with antiphospholipid antibodies and no history of thrombosis

ASA + high‐dose LMWH showed no clear difference in subcutaneous bruises compared with ASA + low‐dose LMWH or UFH (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

LMWH prophylaxis vs UFH

Adverse effects sufficient to stop treatment · pregnant women at increased risk of VTE during pregnancy and the early postnatal period

It is very uncertain whether antenatal (± postnatal) prophylaxis: LMWH changes adverse effects sufficient to stop treatment compared with UFH (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

LMWH prophylaxis vs UFH

Symptomatic thromboembolic events ( · pregnant women at increased risk of VTE during pregnancy and the early postnatal period

It is very uncertain whether antenatal (± postnatal) prophylaxis: LMWH changes symptomatic thromboembolic events ( compared with UFH (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review