PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 1202536

[Heparins].

Abstract

For the therapist, there is only one heparin, characterized by its anticoagulant action, but two methods of administration : intravenous and subcutaneous. Heparin is a true anticoagulant, and directly opposes fibrin formation (antithrombotic action) and potentiates the inactivation of prothrombinase ; this global action, immediately effective, makes heparin undoubtedly superior to the antivitamins K. Nevertheless, its action on thrombogenesis is incomplete : it reacts only slightly or not at all on platelet aggregation and fibrinolysis. In the treatment of phebitis, its efficacity is closely bound with its rational use : early use, continuous and sufficiently prolonged infusion, and carefully adapted dosage are the key factors. The practice of interrupted intravenous injections should be abandoned because it is illogical and dangerous. The subcutaneous method ensures a heparinotherapy in all ways closely comparable with the ideal perfusion. Accidents during heparin therapy are neither more frequent nor more serious than those of a really efficient treatment with antivitamins K. At present, heparin is our most effective weapon in the prevention of post-surgical phlebitis.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Cornu. [Heparins].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1202536/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Subcutaneous heparin compared with continuous intravenous heparin administration in the initial treatment of deep vein thrombosis. A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To quantitatively assess the efficacy and safety of published randomized trials comparing subcutaneous heparin with continuous intravenous heparin for the initial treatment of deep vein thrombosis. DATA IDENTIFICATION: Studies published between January 1986 and April 1991 were identified through computer searches of the MEDLINE database and through reviews of the Science Citation Index, Current Contents, proceedings and abstract books, and references cited in the identified articles. Complete manuscripts were obtained from the authors if only abstracts were available. STUDY SELECTION: Eight clinical trials were identified that compared subcutaneous with intravenous heparin administration in patients with venographically confirmed deep vein thrombosis. DATA EXTRACTION: Each study was independently analyzed for the percentage distribution of thrombosis, the method of outcome measurement, and the heparin dose. The methodologic strength of each study was assessed using predefined standards for the proper evaluation of a therapeutic intervention with particular emphasis on the type of patient allocation and objective measurements. RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSIS: The overall relative risk for efficacy (defined as prevention of extension and recurrence of venous thromboembolism) of subcutaneous compared with intravenous heparin treatment was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.98), whereas for safety (defined as major hemorrhage) it was 0.79 (CI, 0.42 to 1.48). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our meta-analysis indicated that heparin administered subcutaneously twice daily in the initial treatment of deep vein thrombosis is more effective and at least as safe as continuous intravenous heparin administration. Administration of heparin subcutaneously may simplify patient treatment and could facilitate home treatment.

Hemorrhage