1
14 Antiroagulation: how lowcan it get? TH ERAPY Very-low-intensity anticoagulation with warfarin appears to be as effective as standard low-intensity anticoagulation. according to the results of a pilot study conducted by researchers in the US. They randomised tOl patients with variou s indications for warfarin anticoagulation to very- low-intensity anticoagulation [international normalised ratio (lNR) for prothrombin time 1.4-2 .0 ; 922 patient-months of follow-up] or standard lew-intensity anticoagulation (INR 2. 0-3.0; 772 patient-months of follo w-up). Two patients in the very- low-intensity group experienced a thrombotic or embolic complication, compared with D one in the standard low-intensity group. One patient in the latter group developed a major haemorThagic complication. compared with none in the very -low-intensity group. These between- group differences were DOl statistically significant. KkiJl ICL, Benbu..l DH, ldi.lbollea10. HikleD rr. NJ .d at Equal dfcctiYeDCU 01 and Italldanl low·iNcasi ly anlicoqIIlaDon: a piIoI: $bIdy . Soutbem Medical Jo\ImaI 88 : 11». 1139,Nov 1m _ ,

Anticoagulation: how low can it get?

  • Upload
    vunhi

  • View
    214

  • Download
    2

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Anticoagulation: how low can it get?

14

Antiroagulation: how lowcan itget?

TH ERAPY

Very-low-inten sity anticoagulation with warfarinappears to be as effective as standard low-intensityanticoagulation. according to the results of a pilotstudy conducted by researchers in the US.

They randomised tOl patients with variou sindica tions for warfarin anticoagulation tovery- low-intensity anticoagulation [interna tionalnormalised ratio (lNR) for prothrombin time 1.4-2.0 ;922 patient-months of follow -up] or standardlew -intensi ty anticoagulation (INR 2.0-3.0; 772patient-months of follo w-up).

Two patien ts in the very-low-intensity groupexperienced a thrombotic or embolic complication,compared with Done in the standard low- intensitygroup. One patient in the latter group developed amajor haemorThagic complication. compared withnone in the very-low-intensity group. The se between­group differences were DOl stati stically significant .KkiJl ICL, Benbu..l DH, ldi.lbollea10. HikleD rr.~ NJ.d atEqual dfcctiYeDCU 01vay·Iow·~~ and Italldanllow·iNcasi ly anlicoqIIlaDon: a piIoI: $bIdy. Soutbem Medical Jo\ImaI 88 :11».1139,Nov 1m _ ,