Cochrane · systematic review · CD007557
Unfractionated heparin versus low molecular weight heparins for avoiding heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia in postoperative patients
Junqueira, DR, Zorzela, LM, Perini, E · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2017 · Cochrane Library
VascularAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
3
current version
GRADE rated
3
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 3 · 100%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Is unfractionated heparin (UFH) use better than low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) use to avoid heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia?
Population: people undergoing surgical procedures and treated with UFH or LMWH for prophylaxis of thrombotic events lasting at least 5 days
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) | RR 0.23 [0.07, 0.73] | 3 studies · 1398 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
HIT in people undergoing major surgical procedures | RR 0.22 [0.06, 0.75] | 2 studies · 586 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
HIT complicated by venous thromboembolism | RR 0.22 [0.06, 0.84] | 3 studies · 1398 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |