DVT prophylaxis clinical trials results

Acenocoumarol versus Nadroparin
Hamulyak, 1994
Acenocoumarol
versus
Nadroparin 60 anti-Xa IU /kg x1
THR or TKR (stratified)single blind
Follow-up duration: Day 10 ± 2
Acenocoumarol versus Reviparin
Samama, 2001
Acenocoumarol
versus
Reviparin 4200 anti-Xa IU x1
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 6 weeks
Acenocoumarol versus unfractionated heparin
van Geloven, 1977
Acenocoumarol
versus
UFH 4000 ·x2
THRdouble blind
Follow-up duration: NA
antixarin versus unfractionated heparin
Limmer, 1994
Antixarin 2500 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
General surgeryOpen
apixaban versus enoxaparin
ADVANCE 3, 2010
NCT00423319
apixaban 2.5mg twice daily for 35 days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg once daily for 35 days
patients undergoing elective total hip replacement surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 35 days (+60)
21 countries
ADOPT, 2011
NCT00457002
apixaban, administered orally at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily for 30 days
versus
enoxaparin, administered subcutaneously at a dose of 40 mg once daily for 6 to 14 days
acutely ill patients who had congestive heart failure or respiratory failure or other medical disorders and at least one additional risk factor for venous thromboembolism and who were hospitalized with an expected stay of at least 3 daysdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 30 days
apixaban versus enoxaparin (europe regimen)
ADVANCE 2, 2010
NCT00452530
apixaban 2.5mg twice daily during 12 days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg once daily 12 days
patients undergoing elective unilateral or bilateral total knee replacementdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 12 days
27 countries
apixaban versus enoxaparin (US regimen)
APROPOS 2.5mg, 2007
NCT00097357
apixaban 2.5mg BID for 12 days
versus
enoxaparin 30mg twice daily for 12 days
patients undergoing elective total knee replacement surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 12 days
ADVANCE-1, 2008
NCT00371683
apixaban 2.5 mg orally twice daily for 10 to 14 days
versus
enoxaparin 30mg subcutaneously every 12 hours for 10-14 days
patients undergoing knee-replacement surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 10-14 days
14 countries
ardeparin versus placebo
Levine, 1996
ardeparin 50/kgx2 +elastic stockings
versus
Placebo+elastic stockings
Kneedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 14 days
ardeparin versus unfractionated heparin
Godwin, 1993
Ardeparin 90 and 50 units/kg b.i.d
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominopelvic surgeryBlind
aspirin versus control
Clagett, 1975
A1300
versus
control
open
Zekert VI, 1982
A1500
versus
control
open
Aspirin versus no treatment
Pasteyer, 1977
Aspirin 1000mg daily + Hep
versus
control (Hep alone)
Elective orthopaedic surgery
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
Rocha, 1986
Aspirin 250mg or 1000mg daily
versus
control (combination of heparin plus dihydroergotamine)
total hip replacementopen
Follow-up duration: 1 weeks
aspirin versus placebo
MRC, 1972
A600
versus
placebo
general surgerydouble-blind
Loew DVT, 1974
A600
versus
Placebo
double-blind
Erfurt-A, 1979
A1500
versus
Placebo
double-blind
Zekert V, 1980
A1500+Hep???
versus
Placebo
double-blind
Vinazzer I, 1980
A1500+Hep v Hep
versus
Placebo
double-blind
Vinazzer II, 1977
A1000+Hepv Hep
versus
Placebo
double-blind
Aspirin versus placebo
Zekert-I , 1974
Aspirin 1500mg daily
versus
placebo
patients undergoing surgery of hip-joint proximal fracturesdouble-blind
Powers , 1976
A1300
versus
placebo
traumatic orthopaedic surgery
Erfurt-B , 1979
A1500
versus
placebo
traumatic orthopaedic surgerydouble-blind
aspirin versus placebo
PEP hip-fracture, 2000
aspirin 160mg/d started preoperatively and continued for 35 days
versus
placebo
patients undergoing surgery for hip fractureDouble blind
Follow-up duration: 35 days
Australia, New Zealand, South Africa,
PEP elective arthroplasty, 2000
aspirin 160mg/d started preoperatively and continued for 35 daysA
versus
placebo
Patients undergoing elective hip or knee arthroplastyDouble blind
Follow-up duration: 35 days
New Zealand
Aspirin versus placebo
Stockholm-I, 1975
Aspirin 2000mg daily
versus
placebo
elective surgery of the hipdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
Harris-I, 1977
Aspirin 1200mg daily
versus
placebo
patients over 40 years of age, who had undergone total hip replacementdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 1 weeks
McKenna-I, 1980
Aspirin 975mg or 3900mg daily
versus
placebo
total knee replacementdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
Sautter, 1983
Aspirin 900mg daily + sulfinpyrazone
versus
placebo
patient with total hip replacement
Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
McBride, 1983
A1800+Dipyridamole
versus
placebo
Elective orthopaedic surgery
Follow-up duration: 1 weeks
aspirin + dipyridamol versus control
Chicago, 1982
aspirin, 300 mg bid, and dipyridamole, 75 mg tid
versus
control
patients with acute spinal cord injury open
aspirin + dipyridamol versus no treatment
Morris-B , 1977
Aspirin 900 mg daily + dipyridamole
versus
control
elderly patients with hip fracturesopen
Lyon-I, 1975
Aspirin 1500 mg daily + Dipyridamole
versus
control
Elective orthopaedic surgery
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
aspirin + dipyridamol versus placebo
Encke-II , 1976
Aspirin 1500mg daily, Aspirin 990mg daily + dipyridamol
versus
placebo
patients with abdominal operations double-blind
Hamburg, 1976
A+Dipyridamole,A1000
versus
placebo
Elective orthopaedic surgery
Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Frankfurt, 1981
A+Dip,A1320
versus
placebo
patients with myocardial infarctiondouble-blind
betrixaban versus enoxaparin
APEX, 2016
NCT01583218
betrixaban (at a dose of 80 mg once daily) for 35 to 42 days
versus
subcutaneous enoxaparin (at a dose of 40 mg once daily) for 10±4 days
double-blind
CECT versus IPC
Murakami, 2003
miniaturized sequential device continuous enhanced-circulation therapy CECT
versus
standard calf-length sequential IPC device
Adult trauma patients recruited in emergency departmentopen
United States
CECT + aspirin versus LMWH
Gelfer, 2006
continuous enhanced circulation therapy (CECT) combined with low-dose aspirin
versus
enoxaparin 40 mg daily
patients who underwent total hip or knee arthroplasty open
Follow-up duration: 8 days
certoparin versus control
Kock, 1995
Certoparin 3000 IU
versus
no prophylaxis
patients with minor injuries treated with plaster-cast immobilisation of the legopen
Follow-up duration: 15 days
certoparin versus UFH
CERTIFY, 2010

versus
certoparin versus unfractionated heparin
Schmitz-Huebner, 1984
Certoparin (dose 1 and dose 2) b.i.d.
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Sasahara, 1986
Certoparin 3000 + DHE
versus
UFH 10 000 units +DHE
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 7 days
Voigt, 1986
Certoparin 3000 + DHE
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
Welzel, 1988
Certoparin 2500 + DHE
versus
UFH 10 000 units+DHE
Abdominal surgeryOpen
Follow-up duration: 7 days
Kakkar, 1989
Certoparin 3000 + DHE
versus
UFH 10 000 units+DHE
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Adolf, 1989
Certoparin 3000
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Heilmann, 1989
Certoparin 3000
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Gynaecological surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
Baumgartner, 1989
Certoparin 3000 + DHE
versus
UFH 5 000 units+DHE
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
Hoffmann and Largiade, 1990
Certoparin 3000 + DHE
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryNA
Koppenhagen, 1990
Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Schielke, 1991
Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units + DHE
versus
UFH 10 000 units + DHE
Abdominal surgeryOpen
Koppenhagen, 1992
Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Hoffmann and Largiader, 1992
Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominothoracic surgeryBlind
Heilmann, 1997
Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Gynaecological and breast surgeryBlind
Haas, 1999
Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
General surgeryBlind
certoparine + DHE versus Unfractionated heparin
Haas , 1987
Sandoz +0.5mg DHE
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
Lassen, 1989
certoparin 3000+0.5mg DHE x1
versus
placebo
Hip fracturedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 6 days
Lassen, 1988
certoparin 3000+0.5mg DHE, x1
versus
Placebo
Elective hipdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 6 days
compression stocking group versus control (on top fondaparinux)
Cohen (L8405), 2007
fondaparinux 2.5mg plus graduated compression stockings
versus
fondaparinux 2.5mg daily
patients undergoing elective or emergency hip surgeryopen
Follow-up duration: 42 days
Brazil, UK, Hong Kong, Spain
dabigatran 150mg versus enoxaparin
RE-NOVATE (150mg), 2007
NCT00168818
dabigatran etexilate 150 mg q.d. 28-35 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg q.d. for 28-25 days
Total hip replacement double blind
Follow-up duration: 28-35 days, median 33d
Europe, Australia, South Africa
dabigatran 150mg versus enoxaparin (europe regimen)
RE-MODEL (150mg), 2007
dabigatran etexilate 150 mg q.d. for 6-10 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg q.d. for 6-10 days
Total knee replacement double blind
Follow-up duration: 6-10 days, mean 8 days
Europe, Australia, South Africa
dabigatran 150mg versus enoxaparin (US regimen)
RE-MOBILIZE (150mg), 2008
dabigatran etexilate 150 mg q.d. for 12-15 days
versus
enoxaparin 30 mg SC BID after surgery for 12-15 days
Total knee replacement double blind
Follow-up duration: 12-15 days, median 14d
US, Canada, Mexico, UK
dabigatran 220mg versus enoxaparin
RE-NOVATE 2, 0
NCT00657150
dabigatran 220mg once daily for 28-35 Days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg subcutaneous once daily for 28-35 Days
patients undergoing total hip-replacement surgerydouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 28-35 days (mean 32d)
RE-NOVATE (220mg), 2007
NCT00168818
dabigatran etexilate 220 mg q.d. for 28-35 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg q.d. for 23-35 days
Total hip replacementdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 28-35 days, median 33d
Europe, Australia, South Africa
dabigatran 220mg versus enoxaparin (europe regimen)
RE-MODEL (220mg), 2007
dabigatran etexilate 220 mg q.d. 6-10 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg q.d. for 6-10 days
patients undergoing total knee replacementdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 6-10 days, mean 8 days
Europe, Australia, South Africa
dabigatran 220mg versus enoxaparin (US regimen)
RE-MOBILIZE (220mg), 2008
dabigatran etexilate 220 mg for 12-15 days
versus
Enoxaparin 30mg SC BID after surgery for 12-15 days
Total knee replacement double blind
Follow-up duration: 12-15 days, median 14d
US, Canada, Mexico, UK
dalteparin versus Dextran
Matzsch , 1991
dalteparin
versus
Dextran
Elective hip
Eriksson , 1988
dalteparin
versus
Dextran
Elective hip
Matzsch , 1988
dalteparin
versus
Dextran
Elective hip
dalteparin versus placebo
D-KAf (Selby), 2007
NCT00187408
dalteparin 5000U daily
versus
placebo
below-knee fractures repaired surgically
Leizorovicz, 2004
Dalteparin 5000E once daily, 1' days
versus
placebo
Congestive heart failure (NYHA III–IV), acute or chronic respiratory disease, infectious and rheumatologic diseasedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 21 days
Jorgensen, 1989
dalteparin 5000 x1
versus
Placebo
Hip fracturedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 9 days
Torholm, 1991
dalteparin 5000x1
versus
Placebo
Elective hipdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 9 days
Ockelford , 1989
Dalteparin 2500 anti-Xa units
versus
Placebo
general surgeryBlind
Lapidus, 2007
Dalteparin 5000 IU
versus
Placebo
patients surgically treated for Achilles tendon rupture double-blind
Follow-up duration: 43 days
Lapidus, 2007
Dalteparin 5000 IU
versus
Placebo
patients undergoing ankle fracture surgerydouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 44 days
dalteparin versus UFH
PROTECT, 2011
NCT00182143
subcutaneous dalteparin 5000 IU once daily
versus
unfractionated heparin 5000 IU twice daily
critically ill patientsdouble-blind
Canada, Australia, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, US, UK
Scala, 1990
Dalteparin 120 IU/kg anti-Xa SC twice daily
versus
Standard heparin continuous IV infusion adaptedto maintain aPTTbetween 1.5 and2.5 times controlvalue
acute myocardial infarctionopen
Follow-up duration: 7 d
dalteparin versus Unfractionated heparin
Binsack , 1986
dalteparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
dalteparin versus unfractionated heparin
Briel, 1988
Dalteparin 5000
versus
UFH 10 000 units+DHE
Gynaecological surgeryNA
dalteparin versus Unfractionated heparin
Barre , 1987
dalteparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
Dechavanne , 1989
dalteparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
dalteparin versus unfractionated heparin
Bergqvist, 1986
Dalteparin 5000
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Onarheim, 1986
Dalteparin 5000
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 1 month
dalteparin versus Unfractionated heparin
Eriksson , 1989
dalteparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
Haas , 1985
dalteparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
dalteparin versus unfractionated heparin
Koller, 1986
Dalteparin 7500
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 30 days
Koller, 1986
Dalteparin 2500
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 30 days
Fricker, 1988
Dalteparin 5000
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominopelvic surgeryOpen
Follow-up duration: 1-2 months
Bergqvist, 1988
Dalteparin 5000
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Caen, 1988
Dalteparin 2500
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 1 month
Borstad, 1988
Dalteparin 5000
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Gynaecological surgeryBlind
dalteparin versus Unfractionated heparin
Monreal , 1989
dalteparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Hip
dalteparin versus unfractionated heparin
Creperio, 1990
Dalteparin 2500
versus
UFH 10 000 units
General surgeryBlind
Hartl, 1990
Dalteparin 2500
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: > 7 days
Borstad, 1992
Dalteparin 2500 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Gynaecological surgeryBlind
Kakkar, 1993
Dalteparin 2500 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
deltaparin versus control
Michot, 2002
deltaparin 2500IU 60-120min before procedure, followed 6hrs after the end of the procedure by 2500IU (<70kg) or 5000 IU(>70kg)
versus
no treatment
patients requiring diagnostic or therapeutic arthoscopic knee surgery as outpatients; aged18 to 80 years.open
Follow-up duration: 30 days
Switzerland.
desirudin versus enoxaparin
Ericksson, 1997
desirudin 15mg SC twice daily for 8-12 days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg once daily for 8-12 days
Patients who undergo total hip replacementdouble blind
Europe
desirudin versus UFH
REVASC, 1997
desirudin 15mg twice daily
versus
unfractionated heparin 5000 IU three times a day
patients having a primary elective total hip replacement
Eriksson, 1996
recombinant hirudin, desirudin (CGP 39393) 10, 15, or 20 mg twice daily started just before surgery and continued for 8-11 days
versus
unfractionated heparin 5000 IU three times daily started just before surgery and continued for 8-11 days
patients undergoing elective hip surgerydouble blind
Europe
dipyridamol versus no treatment
Morris-A , 1977
dipyridamole
versus
control
elderly patients with hip fracturesopen
dipyridamol + aspirin versus control
Parodi I, 1973
Dip,A1000+Dip
versus
control
open
Parodi II, 1973
A1500,Dip,A+Dip
versus
control
open
Australian I, 1975
A1000+Dip
versus
control
open
Australian II, 1976
A1000+Dip
versus
control
open
Toulouse I, 1979
A990+Dip
versus
control
open
Zekert-III, 1977
A1500,A1300+Dip,A1000+Dip
versus
control
open
Harjola DVT, 1982
A1500,Dip,A+Dip
versus
control
open
Weiss, 1977
A990+Dip
versus
control
open
dipyridamol + aspirin versus placebo
Encke IA, 1976
A990,A+Dip
versus
Placebo
double-blind
Encke IB, 1976
A1500,A990+Dip
versus
Placebo
double-blind
edoxaban versus enoxaparin (short duration)
STARS J-V, 0
NCT01181167
edoxaban 30 mg once daily for 11 to 14 days
versus
subcutaneous enoxaparin 2,000 IU, equivalent to 20 mg, twice daily (BID) for 11 to 14 days
total hip arthroplasty double-blind
japan
enoxaparin versus control
Canata, 2003
enoxaparin sc daily (dose not specified)
versus
no treatment
ACL reconstruction for symptomatic ACL-deficient knees
Follow-up duration: 6 days
Italy
enoxaparin versus Dextran
DES Group , 1991
Enoxaparin
versus
Dextran
Elective hip
enoxaparin versus no treatment
Ho [43],
Enoxaparin 4000 anti-Xa units
versus
No treatment
Open
Warwick, 1995
enoxaparin 4000x1 + elastic stockings
versus
no treatment + elastic stockings
Elective hipopen
Follow-up duration: 8-10 days
enoxaparin versus placebo
LIFENOX, 2011
NCT00622648
subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg daily for 10±4 days
versus
placebo
hospitalized, acutely ill medical patientsdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 30 days
China, India, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, the Philippines, and Tunisia
Enoxaparin versus placebo
Lederle, 2006
Enoxaparin 40 mg once daily, until hospital discharge
versus
placebo
Hospitalization in general medical unitdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 90 days
Samama, 1999
Enoxaparin 20 mg or 40 mg once daily, 6–14 days
versus
placebo
Acute decompensated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with mechanical ventilationdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 6-14 days
enoxaparin versus placebo
Kalodiki, 1996
enoxaparin 4000x1
versus
Placebo
Elective hipdouble blind
Follow-up duration: discharge (8-12 days )
LeGagneux , 1987
Enoxaparin 6000 anti-Xa units
versus
Placebo
prostatectomy surgeryBlind
Leclerc, 1991
Enoxaparin 3000 x2
versus
Placebo
Kneedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 14 days
Samama, 1997
enoxaparin 4000x1+elastic stockings
versus
Placebo+elastic stockings
Elective hipdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 8-12 days
Turpie, 1986
Enoxaparin 3000 x2
versus
Placebo
Elective hipdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 14 days or discharge
Agnelli, 1998
Enoxaparin, 40 mg/d subcutaneously within 24 hours postoperatively plus compression stockings for >=7 days
versus
compression stockings + placebo
Elective neurosurgery, 18 years or older, without excess bleeding risk
Follow-up duration: 30 days
Melon, 1987
Enoxaparin, 20 mg/d subcutaneously 18-24 hours postoperatively for 10 days
versus
placebo
Neurosurgery, adult, 45-90 kg of weight, without excess bleeding risk
Follow-up duration: NA
enoxaparin versus UFH
Bergmann and Neuhart, 1996
enoxaparin 20 mg once daily for 10 days
versus
unfractionated heparin (UFH) 5000 IU twice daily
elderly in-patients bedridden for an acute medical illnessdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
Lechler, 1996
enoxaparin 40 mg
versus
unfractionated heparin (Ca-heparin), 3 x 5,000 U)
hospitalized medical patientsdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 7 days
Kleber, 2003
enoxaparin 40 mg once daily for 10 +/2 days
versus
UFH 5000 IU 3 times daily for 10 +/2 days
severe respiratory disease or heart failureopen
Follow-up duration: 10 +/- 2 days
Germany
enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin
Samama 2, 1988
Enoxaparin 4000
versus
UFH 15 000 units
General surgeryOpen
Follow-up duration: 7 days
Samama 1, 1988
Enoxaparin 2000
versus
UFH 15 000 units
General surgeryOpen
Follow-up duration: 7 days
enoxaparin versus Unfractionated heparin
Levine , 1991
Enoxaparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin
Samama 3, 1988
Enoxaparin 6000
versus
UFH 15 000 units
General surgeryOpen
Follow-up duration: 7 days
enoxaparin versus Unfractionated heparin
Planes , 1988
Enoxaparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin
Kaaja, 1992
Enoxaparin 2000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Gynaecological surgeryBlind
Gazzaniga (ISG), 1993
Enoxaparin 2000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
General and vascular surgeryOpen
Nurmohamed, 1995
Enoxaparin 2000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
General surgeryBlind
McLeod (Canadian), 1995
Enoxaparin 4000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Colorectal surgeryBlind
Gonzalez, 1996
Bemiparin 2500 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal surgeryBlind
ENOXACAN, 1997
Enoxaparin 4000 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominopelvic surgeryBlind
error versus placebo
Denver-I ,
SP
versus
placebo
High risk medical patients
Denver-Il , 1980
dipyridamole 100 mg a day and aspirin 1200 mg a day
versus
placebo
patients with recurring venous thromboembolism double-blind
Follow-up duration: 18 months
Toulouse-Il , 0
A990+Dip
versus
placebo
patients with strokedouble-blind
Den Ottolander , 1982
A1500+RA233
versus
placebo
patients with decompensated heart disease
GRAND , 1987
GR32191B
versus
placebo
High risk medical patients
Jones , 1987
Dazoxidben
versus
placebo
High risk medical patients
extended prophylaxis versus standard prophylaxis
PENTHIFRA–PLUS (Eriksson), 2003
25-31 days of fondaparinux 2.5-mg once-daily
versus
6-8 days of fondaparinux 2.5-mg once-daily
patients undergoing hip fracture surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 19-23 days
Lausen, 1998
Tinzaparin 3500 UI/qd sc for 28 days started in preop
versus
Tinzaparin 3500 UI/qd + GES for 1 week started in preop
>18 years, open major abdominal surgery and non cardiac thoracic surgery of >1hour duration.Open, blinded evaluation
Follow-up duration: 28 days
ENOXACAN II (Bergqvist), 2002
Enoxaparin 40 mg UI/qd sc for 25-31 days started in preop
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg IU/qd sc for 6 to 10 days (GES optional) started in preop
> 40 years, open major abdominal oncologic elective surgery of >45 minutes duration (includes gynecological surgery)double blind
Follow-up duration: 3 months
FAME (Rasmussen), 2006
Dalteparin 5000 UI/qd SC for 28 days started in preop
versus
Dalteparin 5000 UI/qd SC for 7 days + GES started in preop
> 18 years, major abdominal surgery of >1 hour durationOpen, blinded evaluation
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Extended-duration prophylaxis versus error
EXCLAIM, 2010
NCT00077753
Enoxaparin, 40 mg/d subcutaneously (for 28 +/-4 days after receiving openlabel enoxaparin for an initial 10+/-4 days
versus
placebo for 28 +/-4 days after receiving openlabel enoxaparin for an initial 10+/-4 days.
Acutely Ill Medical Patients With Recently Reduced Mobilitydouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 28 days
North and South America
extended-duration thromboprophylaxis versus standard-duration thromboprophylaxis
Marlovits, 2007
extended-duration thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin for 20 days
versus
standard thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin (3 to 8 days)
patients who had undergone arthroscopic surgery of the anterior cruciate ligamentdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: <=28 days
Austria
Flurbiprofen versus no treatment
Mocris-C , 1977
Flurbiprofen
versus
control
elderly patients with hip fracturesopen
fluxum versus placebo
Valle , 1988
Parnaparin 3200 anti-Xa units
versus
Placebo
general surgeryBlind
fluxum versus Unfractionated heparin
Chiapuzzo , 1988
Fluxum
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
Pini , 1989
Fluxum
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Hip
fondaparinux versus enoxaparin
L8541, 0
fondaparinux 2.5mg subcutaneous once-daily for 7+/-2 days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg s.c. once-daily
chinese patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery of the lower limbssingle-blind
Follow-up duration: 9 days (49d)
China
L8635, 0
Fondaparinux 2.5mg once daily subcutaneously for 7 days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg once daily SC for 7 days
Taiwanese patients undergoing elective knee replacementopen, blind assessment
Follow-up duration: 10 days
Taiwan
BRiEF,
NCT00521885
fondaparinux 2.5mg qd
versus
enoxaparin 40mg qd
acute medically ill, non-surgical patients
Germany
PENTAMAKS (Bauer), 2001
fondaparinux 2.5-mg once-daily subcutaneous, starting 6 hours after surgery
versus
enoxaparin 30mg twice daily (North america recommendation)
elective major knee surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 11 days
North america
PENTHIFRA (Eriksson), 2001
fondaparinux 2.5-mg once-daily subcutaneous, starting 6 hours after surgery
versus
enoxaprin 40mg once daily
hip fracture surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 11 days
21 countries
EPHESUS (Lassen), 2002
fondaparinux 2.5-mg once-daily subcutaneous, starting 6 hours after surgery
versus
enoxaprin 40mg once daily
elective hip replacement surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 11 days (6 weeks)
16 European countries
PENTATHLON (Turpie), 2002
fondaparinux 2.5-mg once-daily subcutaneous, starting 6 hours after surgery
versus
enoxaparin 30mg twice daily (North america recommendation)
elective hip replacement surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 11 days
USA, Canada, Australia
PEGASUS, 2005
once-daily subcutaneous injections of fondaparinux 2·5 mg started 6 h after surgery for 5–9 days
versus
once-daily subcutaneous injections of dalteparin 5000 units for 5–9 days (2500 units each, given 2 h before surgery and 12 h after the preoperative administration)
patients undergoing major abdominal surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 10 days (30 days)
22 countries
Turpie, 2001
pentasaccharide Org31540/SR90107A subcutaneous once daily at doses 0.75 mg, 1.5 mg, 3.0 mg, 6.0 mg, and 8.0 mg
versus
enoxaparin 30mg once daily subcutaneous
patients undergoing total hip replacementdouble blind
Follow-up duration: >15 days
US, Canada, Autralia
fondaparinux versus placebo
DRI4757, 0
fondaparinux subcutaneously at 0.75, 1.5, 2.5, and 3.0 mg for at least 10 calendar days, (with a maximum of 14 days)
versus
placebo
Japanese patients undergoing elective total knee replacement surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 14 days
Japan
ARTEMIS (Cohen), 2006
Fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily for 6–14 days
versus
placebo
High-risk medical patientsdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 6-15 days
8 countries
fondaparinux versus placebo (on top intermittent pneumatic comp.)
APOLLO (Turpie), 2007
fondaparinux 2.5 mg s.c. for 5-9 days, starting 6-8 h postoperatively + intermittent pneumatic compression
versus
placebo s.c. for 5-9 days, starting 6-8 h postoperatively + intermittent pneumatic compression
Patients aged at least 40 years undergoing abdominal surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
US
Footpump versus LMWH
Stone, 1996
intermittent pneumatic calf compression
versus
Enoxaparin
total hip replacementopen
Warwick, 1998
A-V Impulse System foot pump
versus
LMWH
primary total hip replacementopen
Follow-up duration: 8 days
Blanchard, 1999
continuous intermittent pneumatic compression of the foot by means of the arteriovenous impulse system
versus
one daily subcutaneous injection of nadroparin calcium (dosage adapted to body-weight)
patients undergoing total knee arthroplastyopen (blinded assessment)
Follow-up duration: 12 days
Footpump (adjunctive therapy) versus UFH then aspirin
Stannard (vs UFH+asp), 1996
intermittent pulsatile pneumatic-pump compression of the plantar venous plexus
versus
UFH followed by aspirin
patients undergoing elective total hip replacement arthroplastyopen
Footpump (monotherapy) versus control
Scurr, 1981
Plantar flexion and dorsiflexion of the feet while the patient is on the operating table by the use of a mechanical device (the Pedi-Pulsor)
versus
control
abdominal or thoracic surgeryopen
Wilson, 1992

versus
Elective knee remplacementopen
GCS versus ???
Schirai, 1985

versus
GCS versus LMWH
Camporese, 2008
full-length graduated compression stocking for 7 days
versus
once-daily subcutaneous injection of LMWH (nadroparin, 3800 anti-Xa IU) for 7 days or 14 days
patients undergoing knee arthroscopy open
Italy
GCS versus no prophylaxis
Barnes, 1978
graded-compression stockings
versus
nostockings
patients undergoing total hip replacement
*Inada, 1983
graduated compression stocking on one leg
versus
no GCS on the other leg serving as a control.
patients undergoing major surgery
Rosengarten, 1970

versus
*Ohlund, 1983
graded compression of the calf
versus
elective total hip arthroplasty
*Wille-Jorgensen, 1989
regional anesthesia and graded compression stockings
versus
general anesthesia
elective hip arthroplasty
*Tsapogas, 1971

versus
*Scurr, 1977
graduated static compression stockings on one leg
versus
other leg being used as a control
patients undergoing Abdominal surgeryopen
Turner, 1984
graduated compression stockings
versus
not wear the stockings
patients undergoing Gynecologic surgery
Allan, 1983
graduated compression stockings
versus
control
patients undergoing Abdominal surgery
Turpie (GCS vs crtl), 1989
graduated compression stockings
versus
untreated control
patients undergoing Neurosurgery surgery
Holford, 1976
Graded compression
versus
control
patients undergoing major operations
CLOTS, 2009
Thigh length graduated Compression Stockings
versus
no graduated Compression Stockings
Acute Stroke patientsopen, blind asessor
Follow-up duration: 30 days
3 countries
GCS versus UFH
Fasting, 1985
graded compression stockings (TED stockings, Kendall Co.)
versus
low-dose heparin (Heparin Leo 5 000 I.U. subcutaneously twice daily)
elective major surgery
Hansberry (vs UFH), 1991
thromboembolic stockings
versus
heparin plus dihydroergotamine
patients undergoing a major urological operation
Follow-up duration: 6 days
Rasmussen (GCS vs UFH), 1998
graduated compression stockings to the knee (TED stockings)
versus
subcutaneous heparin
patients (age more than 40 yrs) admitted for major abdominal surgery open
GCS + asp versus aspirin
Muir, 2000
graded compression stockings
versus
standard care alone
strokeopen (blinded assessment)
Kierkegaard, 1993
Graduated compression stockings were randomly fitted to one leg
versus
the otherleg serving as a control
myocardial infraction or ACS
GCS + dextran versus dextran
*Bergqvist, 1984
one leg encased in a graded compression stocking
versus
other leg unstockinged
patients undergoing Abdominal surgery
Fredin, 1989
graded compression stockings + dextran
versus
dextran alone
patients undergoing THR surgery
GCS + LMWH versus LMWH
Kalodiki (GCS+LMWH vs LMWH), 1996
enoxaparin (40 mg once daily) plus graduated elastic compression (TEDR stockings) for 8-12 days
versus
low molecular weight heparin: (enoxaparin 40 mg once daily)
patients having elective total hip replacement
GCS + UFH versus UFH
*Rasmussen (adj), 1988
subcutaneous heparin and graduated compression stockings to the knee (TED stockings),
versus
subcutaneous heparin
patients (age more than 40 yrs) admitted for major abdominal surgery open
Torngren, 1980

versus
Wille-Jorgensen, 1985
low-dose heparin treatment with graded compression stockings
versus
low-dose heparin treatment (5000 units twice daily subcutaneously)
patients undergoing Abdominal surgery
Wille-Jorgensen, 1991
low dose heparin and graded compression stockings
versus
low dose heparin
patients undergoing Abdominal surgery
GCS +IPC versus IPC
Mellbring, 1986
graduated static compression + peroperative intermittent pneumatic calf compression
versus
peroperative intermittent pneumatic calf compression
patients undergoing major abdominal surgery
Scurr (GCS+IPC vs IPC), 1987
simultaneous use of graduated compression stockings and intermittent sequential pneumatic compression
versus
intermittent sequential pneumatic compression
patients undergoing Abdominal surgery
Hydroxychloroquine versus no treatment
Massachusetts-I , 1981
Aspirin 1200mg daily, Aspirin 1200mg daily + hydroxychloroquine 300 mg b.i.d.
versus
control
patients with upper femoral fractures open
hydroxychloroquine versus placebo
Carter IA, 1971
Hydroxy
versus
placebo
double-blind
Hydroxychloroquine versus placebo
Danish-A , 1976
Hydroxychloroquine sulphate
versus
placebo
patients with fractures of the hip, pelvis, or thoracolumbar spinedouble-blind
hydroxychloroquine versus placebo
Carter IB, 1971
Hydroxy
versus
placebo
double-blind
Hydroxychloroquine versus placebo
Danish-B , 1976
Hydroxychloroquine sulphate
versus
placebo
patients with fractures of the hip, pelvis, or thoracolumbar spine
hydroxychloroquine versus placebo
Carter II, 1974
Hydroxy
versus
Placebo
double-blind
New York, 1977
Hydroxy
versus
placebo
double-blind
Vermont, 1975
Hydroxy
versus
placebo
double-blind
Hydroxychloroquine versus placebo
Massachusetts-II, 1976
Hydroxychloroquine 600mg daily
versus
placebo
fractures or orthopaedic operations involving the skeleton between the knee and the pelvis
Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Cooke, 1977
Hydroxychloroquine
versus
placebo
elective surgery on the hipdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
Hume-A, 1977
Hydroxychloroquine
versus
placebo
total hip replacement
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
Stockholm-II, 1981
Hydroxychloroquine
versus
placebo
total hip replacement
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
IPC versus aspirin
HAAS I, 1990

versus
elective knee remplacementopen
HAAS II, 1990

versus
elective knee remplacementopen
McKenna (vs aspirin), 1980

versus
elective knee remplacementopen
IPC versus DHE + low dose heparin
Mellbring, 1986
peroperative intermittent pneumatic calf compression
versus
dihydroergotamine (DHE) combined with low-dose heparin (LDH)
patients undergoing Abdominal surgeryopen
IPC versus LMWH
Kurtoglu, 2004
intermittent pneumatic compression
versus
LMWH 
head/spinal traumatized patients open
Follow-up duration: 1 week after discharge
Turkey
Warwick à exclure, 2002
IPCD/FID
versus
LMWH
open
Ginzburg, 2003
intermittent pneumatic compression
versus
LMWH
Trauma patients >18 years oldopen
Follow-up duration: 30 days
United States
IPC versus UFH
Clarke Pearson, 1993

versus
open
Coe (vs UFH), 1978

versus
open
Hansberry (vs UFH), 1991

versus
open
Kosir, 1998

versus
open
IPC versus vitamin K antagonists
Chandhoke, 1992
IPCD
versus
major urological surgeryopen
paiement, 1987

versus
elective hip replacementopen
Kaempffe, 1991

versus
elective hip & knee replacementopen
IPC + aspirin versus aspirin
Hull 2 (+asp), 1979

versus
patients undergoing elective knee surgeryopen
Hull (+asp), 1979

versus
patients undergoing elective knee surgeryopen
Lieberman (A), 1994
hypotensive epidural anesthesia, external pneumatic-compression boots, and aspirin
versus
hypotensive epidural anesthesia and aspirin
primary unilateral or bilateral total hip arthroplasty with use of hypotensive epidural anesthesiaopen
IPC + dextran versus dextran
Smith (D), 1978
dextran 70 and pneumatic calf compression
versus
dextran 70
open
IPC + GCS versus control
Turpie, 1989
graduated compression stockings plus intermittent pneumatic compression
versus
untreated control
potential neurosurgical patientsopen
Follow-up duration: 14 days
IPC + GCS versus GCS
Goldhaber, 1995
intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) plus graduated compression stockings (GCS)
versus
standard compression stockings alone
patients undergoing coronary artery bypass without concomitant valve surgery or coronary endarterectomyopen
Follow-up duration: hospital stay
Fordyce, 1992
venous foot pump (A-V Impulse System)
versus
control
elective hip replacementopen
Rokito, 1996
TED stockings and thigh-length cuffs that provided sequential pneumatic compression to the calf and thigh
versus
bilateral thigh-high thrombosis embolic deterrent (TED) compression stockings (Kendall Company, MA).
neurosurgeryopen
Turpie, 1989
graduated compression stockings plus intermittent pneumatic compression
versus
graduated compression stockings alone
neurosurgeryopen
Follow-up duration: 14 days
Wautrecht, 1996

versus
neurosurgeryopen
Caprini, 1983

versus
general surgeryopen
Lacut, 2005
elastic stockings combined with intermittent pneumatic compression
versus
elastic stockings alone
patients with a documented intracerebral hemorrhage open
Follow-up duration: 1à days
Pambianco, 1995

versus
strokeopen
IPC + GCS versus LMWH
Norgren, 1998
IPCD/FID + GCS
versus
LMWH
elective knee remplacementopen
IPC + GCS versus UFH
Niolaides, 1983
IPCD + GCS
versus
UFH
general surgeryopen
Santori, 1994
IPC + GCS
versus
UFH
elective hip replacementopen
IPC + GCS +LMWH versus GCS +LMWH
Dickinson, 1998
sequential compression device +enoxaparin (+ GCS)
versus
enoxaparin (+GCS)
neurosurgery, patients with brain tumorsopen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
IPC + UFH versus control
Killewich, 1997
low-dose heparin sodium therapy (5000 U every 12 hours) and calf-length intermittent mechanical compression devices
versus
no prophylaxis
patients undergoing aortic reconstruction for aneurysmal or occlusive disease open
IPC + UFH versus UFH
Ramos, 1996
prophylactic regimen of Pneumatic compression stocking and subcutaneous heparin
versus
with 5,000 U of subcutaneous heparin every 12 h
cardiac surgeryopen
Siragusa (H), 1994

versus
open
IPC – sequential compression versus control
Blackshear à exclure, 1987
Sequential external pneumatic compression
versus
control
abdominal or thoracic surgeryopen
Hull II, 1990
sequential intermittent calf and thigh compression
versus
no prophylaxis
patients undergoing total hip replacementopen
Fisher, 1995
pneumatic sequential leg compression devices
versus
no specific form of prophylaxis
orthopaedic trauma patients with hip and pelvic fracturesopen
Turple II, 1979
intermittent sequential calf compression
versus
patients with intracranial diseaseopen
Knudson, 1994
sequential gradient pneumatic leg compression
versus
control
trauma patientsopen
Kosir, 1996
sequential pneumatic compression devices during surgery and 2 days postoperatively
versus
control
Patients undergoing procedures of at least 1 hr duration (abdominal, thoracic, head and neck, inguinal) requiring general or spinal anestheticopen
Follow-up duration: 30 days
IPC – sequential compression versus Footpump
Elliott, 1999
Calf-thigh sequential pneumatic compression
versus
foot pump (plantar venous pneumatic compression)
Trauma patients >13 years oldopen (blind assessement)
Follow-up duration: NA
United States
IPC – single compression versus control
Prasad, 1982
pneumatic compression of the calf
versus
No Prophylaxis
elderly hemiplegicsopen
Butson, 1981
intermittent pneumatic calf compression, begun after the induction of anesthesia and continued until the patient was walking
versus
control
patients undergoing major abdominal general surgical proceduresopen
Clark, 1974
Pneumatic compression of the calf
versus
abdominal or thoracic surgeryopen
Clarke-Pearson I, 1984

versus
open
Clarke-Pearson II, 1984

versus
abdominal or thoracic surgeryopen
Coe, 1978
low-dose heparin and external pneumatic compression (EPC) of the calves
versus
no treatment
patients undergoing open urological operationsopen
Hills, 1972
intermittent pneumatic compression of calf
versus
abdominal or thoracic surgeryopen
Gallus, 1983
preventive intermittent calf compression
versus
no prophylaxis
elective hip replacementopen
Follow-up duration: in hospital
Bachmann, 1976
low pressure intermittent compression (Phlebo-Dynastat) to calves and thighs started on the day of operation and continued until patients were fully mobilized
versus
patients undergoing joint-replacement operationsopen
Follow-up duration: until patients fully mobilized
Bynke, 1987

versus
neurosurgeryopen
Skillman, 1978
external pneumatic compression (EPC) of the calves
versus
no specific form of prophylaxis
patients undergoing neurosurgical operative proceduresopen
Follow-up duration: NA
Turpie I, 1977
intermittent pneumatic compression of the calf
versus
patients with intracranial diseaseopen
Hull I, 1979
intermittent pulsatile elastic stockings
versus
patients undergoing elective knee surgeryopen
IPC – unknown type versus control
Weitz, 1986
intermittent pneumatic calf compression
versus
open
IPC/FID versus GES
Hansberry, 1991

versus
open
IPCD versus control
McKenna, 1980
IPCD
versus
No Prophylaxis
Elective knee remplacementopen
IPD or GCS versus no prophylaxis
Turpie (IPD or GCS), 1989

versus
Knee length GCS versus Thigh length GCS
Hui THR, 1996
Knee length GCS
versus
Thigh length GCS
Orthopaedic patients THR
Hui TKR, 1996
Knee length GCS
versus
Thigh length GCS
Orthopaedic patients TKR
William, 1996
Knee-length graduated compression stockings
versus
thigh-length graduated compression stoc
orthopaedic surgery
Porteous, 1989
Knee length GCS
versus
Thigh length GCS
General surgical patients
Williams, 1988
Knee length GCS
versus
Thigh length GCS
General surgical patients
Howard, 2004
Knee length GCS
versus
Thigh length GCS
Breast surgery, oncology, ENT, urology, vascular, neurosurgery. And gastrointestinal surgery
LMWH versus UFH
Harenberg, 1990
1 x 1.500 aPTT units of a LMW heparin fraction
versus
3 x 5.000 IU of an unfractionated heparin
patients aged 40-80 yearsdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
Harenberg, 1996
1 daily subcutaneous administration of LMW heparin for 10 days
versus
3 x 5,000 IU unfractionated (UF) heparin for 10 days
medical inpatientsdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
nadroparin versus control
KANT (7 days), 2008
once-daily subcutaneous injection of LMWH (nadroparin, 3800 anti-Xa IU) for 7 days
versus
full-length graduated compression stocking for 7 days
patients undergoing knee arthroscopyopen (blinded assessment)
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Italy
Roth, 1995
0.3 ml sc fraxiparine 2 hours before the operation and self administered daily (except the firstvtwo doses) for 4 days after surgeryn/x
versus
no treatment
patients undergoing ambulatory arthroscopic
Follow-up duration: 4 days
Germany
Kujath, 1993
Nadroparin 2850 IU
versus
no prophylaxis
patients with injuries of the lower limb immobilized by a plaster castopen
Follow-up duration: 16 days
nadroparin versus enoxaparin
FX140, Simonneau G, 2006

versus
nadroparin versus no treatment
Marassi [41],
Nadroparin 2850 anti-Xa units
versus
No treatment
Open
Yoo, 1997
nadroparin 41/kgx1 days 1-3, 62/kg x1 days 4-11+elastic stockings
versus
no treatment
Elective hipopen
Follow-up duration: 10 days
nadroparin versus placebo
Bergmann, 1996
nadroparin 7500 u anti-Xa once daily
versus
placebo
hospitalized medical
Follow-up duration: up to 21
Balas [40],
Nadroparin 2850 anti-Xa units
versus
Placebo
Blind
Nadroparin versus placebo
Fraisse, 2000
Nadroparin 3800–5700E once daily, Until no longer mechanical ventilation, <=21 days
versus
placebo
Acute decompensated chronic obstructive pulmonary diseasewith mechanical ventilationdouble blind
Follow-up duration: <=21 days
Mahe, 2005
nadroparin 7500E once daily, Until hospital discharge, <=21 days
versus
placebo
Congestive heart failure (NYHA III–IV), acute or respiratory disease, nonpulmonary sepsis, cancerdouble blind
Follow-up duration: <=21 days
nadroparin versus placebo
Sourmelis, 1995
nadroparin 3075x1 preop, 6150x1 post op
versus
Placebo
Hip fracturedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 10-12 days
Pezzuoli, 1989
Nadroparin 2850 anti-Xa units
versus
Placebo
general surgeryBlind
Nurmohamed, 1996
Nadroparin, 7500 Institute Choay anti-Xa units per day subcutaneously 18-24 hours postoperatively plus compression for 10 days
versus
compression stockings + placebo
Craniotomy or spinal surgery for tumor or injury, 18 years or older, without excess bleeding risk
Follow-up duration: 56 days
nadroparin versus unfractionated heparin
Kakkar and Murray, 1985
Nadroparin 2850
versus
UFH 10 000 units
General surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: 10 days
EFS, 1988
Nadroparin 2850
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominal surgeryOpen
Follow-up duration: 1 month
nadroparin versus Unfractionated heparin
Leyvraz, 1991
Fraxiparin
versus
Unfractionated heparin
Elective hip
nadroparin versus unfractionated heparin
Dahan, 1989
Nadroparin 2850
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Thoracic surgeryOpen
Barbui, 1990
Nadroparin 2850 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
General surgeryOpen
Eurin, 1994
Nadroparin 2850 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominopelvic surgeryOpen
nadroparin 14d versus control
KANT (14 days), 2008
once-daily subcutaneous injection of LMWH (nadroparin, 3800 anti-Xa IU) for 14 days
versus
full-length graduated compression stocking for 7 days
patients undergoing knee arthroscopy open (blinded assessment)
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Italy
out of hospital Ardeparin versus standard prophylaxis
Heit, 2000
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Ardeparin 100 IU/kg once a day for a total duration of 42 days
versus
Ardeparin 50 IU/kg twice a day for 4-10 days
THR or TKR
out of hospital Dalteparin versus standard prophylaxis
Dahl, 1997
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Dalteparin 5000 IU once a day for a total duration of 35 days
versus
Dalteparin 5000 IU once a day for 7 days (dextran day 0 and day 1)
THR
Lassen, 1998
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Dalteparin 5000 IU once a day for a total duration of 35 days
versus
Dalteparin 5000 IU once a day for 7 days
THR
Hull, 2000
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Dalteparin 5000 IU once a day for a total duration of 35 days
versus
Dalteparin 5000 IU once a day or warfarin for 6 days
THR
out of hospital Enoxaparin versus standard prophylaxis
Bergqvist, 1996
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Enoxaparin 40 mg once a day for a total duration of 30 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg once a day for 10-11 days
THR
Planes, 1996
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Enoxaparin 40 mg once a day for a total duration of 35 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg once a day for 13-15 days
THR
Comp, 2001
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Enoxaparin 40 mg once a day for a total duration of 27-29 days
versus
Enoxaparin 30 mg twice a day for 7-10 days
THR or TKR
out of hospital Nadroparin versus standard prophylaxis
NPHDO, 1998
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital Nadroparin weight-adjusted for a total duration of 37-38 days
versus
Nadroparin weight-adjusted for 16-17 days
THR
out of hospital UFH versus standard prophylaxis
Manganelli, 1998
in hospital thromboprophylaxis followed by out of hospital UFH 5000 IU three times a day for a total duration of 30 days
versus
UFH 5000 IU three times a day for 15 days
THR
parnaparin versus unfractionated heparin
Catania, 1988
Parnaparin 3200
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominal surgeryOpen
Salcuni, 1988
Parnaparin 3200
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominal surgeryOpen
Verardi, 1989
Parnaparin 6400
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominal/urological surgeryNA
Garcea, 1992
Parnaparin 3200 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 15 000 units
Abdominal surgeryOpen
Pharmuka versus placebo
Dahan, 1986
Pharmuka 60 mg once daily, Until hospital discharge,<=10 days
versus
placebo
Congestive heart failure (NYHA III–IV), acute or respiratory infectious diseasedouble blind
Follow-up duration: <10 days
Phenindione versus no treatment
Eskeland, 1966
Phenindione
versus
No treatment
HFSOpen
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Hamilton, 1970
Phenindione
versus
No treatment
HFSOpen
Follow-up duration: 3–10 months
RA233 versus placebo
Wood , 1973
RA233; Aspirin 600mg daily +RA233
versus
placebo
traumatic orthopaedic surgery
reviparin versus control
Wirth, 2001
reviparin 1,750 anti Xa IU Sc once daily for 7-10 days
versus
no treatment
elective knee arthroscopyopen (blind assessement)
Follow-up duration: 7-10 days
Germany
reviparin versus placebo
Lassen, 2002
Reviparin 1750 IU
versus
Placebo
patients who required immobilization in a plaster cast or brace for at least five weeks after a leg fracture or rupture of the Achilles tendondouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 43 days
reviparin versus unfractionated heparin
Kakkar, 1993
Reviparin 1750 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
General and gynaecological surgeryBlind
rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin
MAGELLAN, 2011
NCT00571649
rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 35 days
versus
subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once daily for 10 days
patients hospitalized for acute medical illnessdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 35 days
RECORD 1, 2008
NCT00329628
rivaroxaban 10mg once daily for 35 days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg subcutaneous once daily for 31-39 days
patients undergoing total hip arthroplastydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 36 days (range 30-42)
27 countries worldwide
rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin (europe regimen)
RECORD 3, 2008
NCT00361894
rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 10- 14 days
versus
enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneous once daily for 10-14 days
patients undergoing total knee arthroplastydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 13-17 days
19 countries worldwide
rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin (short duration)
ODIXa-HIP 10mg, 2006
rivaroxaban 10mg daily for 5–9 days
versus
once-daily subcutaneous enoxaparin dose of 40 mg for 5–9 days
patients undergoing elective total hip replacementdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 5-9 days
Europe, Israel
rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin (US regimen)
ODIXa-KNEE, 2005
BAY 59-7939 5mg b.i.d. for 5–9 days
versus
enoxaparin 30 mg b.i.d. for 5–9 days
patients undergoing elective total knee replacement double blind
Follow-up duration: 5-9 days
North America
RECORD 4, 2009
NCT00362232
rivaroxaban 10mg once daily for 10 to 14 days
versus
enoxaparin 30 mg twice daily by subcutaneous injection for 10-14 days
patients who had undergone total-knee-replacement surgery double blind
Follow-up duration: 40 days
12 countries
rivaroxaban (long duration) versus enoxaparin (short duration)
RECORD 2, 2008
NCT00332020
extended thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban 10mg once daily for 31-39 days
versus
enoxaparin 40mg subcutaneous once daily for 10-14 days
patients undergoing elective total hip replacementdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 30-42 days
21 countries worldwide
semuloparin versus enoxaparin
SAVE-HIP1, 2012
NCT00697099
Semuloparin 20 mg once-daily
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg once-daily
SAVE-KNEE, 2012
NCT00718224
Semuloparin 20 mg once-daily
versus
Enoxaparin 30 mg twice-daily
SAVE-HIP 2, 2012
NCT00721760
Semuloparin 20 mg once-daily
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg once-daily
hip fracture surgery
sp versus control
Veth, 1985
Sp+Hep v Hep
versus
control
open
sp versus placebo
Athens, 1981
Sp
versus
placebo
double-blind
SR123781A versus enoxaparin
DRIVE, 2008
NCT00338897
SR123781A for 5-10 days, doses ranging from 0.25 to 4.0 mg daily for 10 days
versus
enoxaparin 40 mg
patients undergoing total hip replacement surgerydouble blind
Follow-up duration: 5-10 days
12 countries
SSHA versus unfractionated heparin
ToÈrngren, 1984
SSHA 50 mg and 37.5 mg
versus
UFH 10 000 units
General surgeryBlind
Follow-up duration: Discharge
Suloctidil versus placebo
Turpie, 1985
Suloctidil
versus
Placebo
double-blind
thigh Length IPCD versus calf Length IPCD
Soderdahl, 1997
Thigh Length IPCD
versus
Calf Length IPCD
patients undergoing major urological surgery open
Follow-up duration: in hospital
ticlopidine versus placebo
Lasierra, 1982
Ticlopidine
versus
placebo
double-blind
Walker, 1974
ticlopidine
versus
placebo
double-blind
Ticlopidine versus placebo
McKenna-II, 1983
Ticlopidine
versus
placebo
Elective orthopaedic surgery
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
Lyon-II, 3000
Ticlopidine
versus
placebo
Elective orthopaedic surgery
Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Gardecki, 3000
Ticlopidine
versus
placebo
Elective orthopaedic surgery
Follow-up duration: 2 weeks
ticlopidine versus placebo
McKenna-II , 1983
Ticlopidine
versus
placebo
high risk (post CVA) medical patients double-blind
tinzaparin versus control
Jorgensen, 2002
Tinzaparin 3500 IU
versus
no prophylaxis
patients over 18 years of age with planned plaster cast on a lower extremity of at least 3 weeks open, assessor-blinded
Follow-up duration: 38 days
tinzaparin versus placebo
Bergqvist [42],
Tinzaparin 3500 anti-Xa units
versus
Placebo
Blind
Lassen, 1991
tinzaparin 50/kg x1 +elastic stockings
versus
Placebo+elastic stockings
Elective hipdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 8-10 days
tinzaparin versus unfractionated heparin
Leizorovicz, 1991
Tinzaparin 2500 and 3500 anti Xa units
versus
UFH 10 000 units
Abdominothoracic and gynaecological surgeryBlind
UFH versus aspirin
Loew, 1977
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
aspirin
all other general surgery
Vinazzer, 1980
UFH twice daily for A days
versus
aspirin
all other general surgery
UFH versus control
Handley, 1972
Heparin 5000 U IV (loading dose) followed by 20 000 U IV twice daily
versus
no heparin
Myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 14 d
Handley (low dose), 1972
Heparin 5000 U IV and 7500 U SC as soon as possible, then 7500 U SC twice daily
versus
no heparin
Myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: 7 d
Blech, 1981
Unfractionated heparin, 5000 U trice daily, until mobilized
versus
control
Heart failure, chest infectionopen
Follow-up duration: <=14 days
Gallus, 1973
heparin 5000 U SC 3 times daily
versus
no heparin
Myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: until mobile
Cade, 0
Unfractionated heparin, 5000 U twice daily, until mobilized or <=10 days
versus
Age >40, complete bed rest, cardiac failure, obesity, previous VTE, cancer or recent surgery
Follow-up duration: <=10 days
Warlow, 1973
Heparin sodium 5000 U SC twice dailyly
versus
no heparin
Myocardial infarctiondouble blind
Follow-up duration: 10 d
Gardlund, 1996
Unfractionated heparin, 5000 U twice daily, until hospital discharge, <=21 days
versus
control
Age >55, infectious disease Immobilizationopen
Follow-up duration: <=60 days
Emerson, 1973
Heparin Low dose SCium9
versus
no heparin
Myocardial infarction
Follow-up duration: NA
Zawilska, 1989
Heparin sodium 5000 IU SC twice dailyy for 14 to 21 days
versus
no heparin
patients with acute myocardial infarction, disqualified for thrombolytic treatment
Follow-up duration: 14-21 d
UFH versus DHE
Muiticentre, 1984
UFH twice daily for 5-7 days
versus
DHE
all other general surgery
Muiticentre 53,S4, 1984
UFH twice daily for 5-7 days
versus
DHE
all other general surgery
UFH versus no treatment
Abernethy, 1974
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Abraham-Inpijn, 1979
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Allen, 1978
UFH twice daily for D
versus
no treatment
urologic surgery
Bergqvist , 1979
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Bergqvist, 1979
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
no treatment
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Bergqvist, 1980
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Caloghera, 1984
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Clarke-Pearson, 1983
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Coe, 1978
UFH twice daily for D
versus
no treatment
urologic surgery
Dechavanne, 1974
UFH 3 times daily for 10 days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Dechavanne, 1975
UFH 3 times daily for 10 days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Galasko , 1976
UFH twice daily (duration unknown)
versus
no treatment
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Gallus , 1973
UFH 3 times daily for A
versus
no treatment
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Gallus , 1973
UFH twice daily for A days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Gallus, 1973
UFH 3 times daily for A
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Gallus, 1976
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Gordon-Smith, 1972
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Groote Schuur, 1979
UFH 3 times daily for 6 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Gruber, 0
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
All other general surgery
Kakkar (IMT), 0
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
All other general surgery
Kettunen, 1974
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Koppenhagen, 1982
UFH twice daily
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Kraytman, 1976
UFH 3 times daily for 6 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Kraytman, 1977
UFH 3 times daily for 6 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Mannucci , 1976
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Marchelli, 1983
UFH 3 times daily for ?
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Morris, 1974
UFH twice daily for 10 days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Morris , 1977
UFH 3 times daily for 10 days
versus
no treatment
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Multiunit, 1974
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Nicolaides, 1972
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Plante, 1979
UFH twice daily for 8 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Sagar, 1974
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Sebeseri, 1975
UFH twice daily for D
versus
no treatment
urologic surgery
Spebar, 1981
UFH twice daily for 5-7 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
VTCSG, 1975
UFH twice daily for 10 days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Welin-Berger, 1982
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
no treatment
elective orthopedic surgery
Ziemski, 1979
UFH 3 times daily for 2 days
versus
no treatment
all other general surgery
Cerrato, 1978
Unfractionated heparin, 5000 IU subcutaneously 3 times a day, starting 2 hours preoperatively for +7 days
versus
no treatment
Elective neurosurgery for tumors, 40 years or older
Follow-up duration: NA
UFH versus oral anticoagulant
van Geloven, 1977
UFH twice daily for 4 days
versus
Oral anticoagulant
all other general surgery
UFH versus placebo
Abraham-Inpijn , 1975
UFH twice daily for 8 days
versus
placebo
elective orthopedic surgery
Bejjani, 1983
UFH twice daily for 2 days
versus
placebo
urologic surgery
Belch, 1980
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Pitt, 1980
Heparin 500 U IV twice daily
versus
placebo
patients with acute myocardial infarction of less than 48 hours duration open
Follow-up duration: 2-3 d
Covey, 1975
UFH twice daily for 8 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Hampson, 1974
UFH 3 times daily for 7- 10 days
versus
placebo
elective orthopedic surgery
Hedlund, 1979
UFH 3 times daily for 5 days
versus
placebo
urologic surgery
Jourdan, 1984
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Kakkar, 1972
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
All other general surgery
Kiil, 1978
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
All other general surgery
Kraytman, 1977
UFH 3 times daily for 6 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Kruse-Blinkenberg, 1980
UFH 3 times daily for 8 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Kutnowski, 1977
UFH 3 times daily for 6 days
versus
placebo
urologic surgery
Lahnborg, 1975
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Lahnborg, 1976
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Lahnborg, 1980
UFH twice daily for 10 days
versus
placebo
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Lawrence, 1977
UFH twice daily for 5 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Lowe , 1981
UFH twice daily for 16 days
versus
placebo
elective orthopedic surgery
Marchetti, 1982
UFH 3 times daily
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Moskovitz, 1978
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Moskovitz, 1978
UFH 3 times daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
elective orthopedic surgery
Muiticentre, 1984
UFH twice daily for 5-7 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Ribaudo, 1975
UFH twice daily for A days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Roberts, 1975
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Strand, 1975
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Svend-Hansen, 1981
UFH 3 times daily for 14 days
versus
placebo
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Taberner, 1978
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Torngren, 0
UFH twice daily for 6-8 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Torngren, 1978
UFH 3 times daily for 6-8 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Torngren, 1978
UFH twice daily for 6-8 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Vandendris, 1980
UFH 3 times daily for 6 days
versus
placebo
urologic surgery
Williams , 1978
UFH twice daily for 14 days
versus
placebo
elective orthopedic surgery
Wu, 1977
UFH twice daily for 7 days
versus
placebo
all other general surgery
Xabregas , 1977
UFH twice daily for 14 days
versus
placebo
traumatic orthopedic surgery
Warfarin versus Ardeparin
RD Heparin, 1994
Warfarin
versus
Ardeparin 50 anti-Xa IU /kg or 90 anti-Xa IU /kg x1
THR or TKROpen
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Heit, 1997
Warfarin
versus
Ardeparin 25, 35, 50 anti-Xa U /kg x2
TKRdouble blind
Follow-up duration: Days 5–14
Warfarin versus Aspirin
Lotke, 1997
Warfarin
versus
Aspirin 325 mg x2
THR or TKR (stratified)Open
Follow-up duration: 6 months
Powers, 1989
Warfarin
versus
Aspirin 650 mg x2
HFSOpen
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Warfarin versus Dalteparin
Francis, 1997
Warfarin
versus
Dalteparin 5000 anti-Xa IU x1
THROpen
Follow-up duration: Day 7 ± 2
Hull, 2000
Warfarin
versus
Dalteparin 5000 anti-Xa IU x1
THRdouble blind
Follow-up duration: Day 6 ± 2
Warfarin versus Danaparoid
Gerhart, 1991
Warfarin
versus
Danaparoid 750 U x2
HFSOpen
Follow-up duration: 9 days
van Comp, 1998
Warfarin
versus
Danaparoid 750 U x2
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Warfarin versus Dextran
Harris, 1972
Warfarin
versus
Dextran 40
THROpen
Follow-up duration: NA
Barber, 1977
Warfarin
versus
Dextran 70
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 11–14 days
Francis, 1983
Warfarin
versus
Dextran 40
THR or TKR (stratified)Open
Follow-up duration: 5–7 days
Myrhe, 1969
Warfarin
versus
Dextran 70
HFSdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Warfarin versus Enoxaparin
Leclerc, 1996
Warfarin
versus
Enoxaparin 30 mg x2
TKRdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 6 months
Colwell, 1999
Warfarin
versus
Enoxaparin 30 mg x2
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Fitzgerald, 2001
Warfarin
versus
Enoxaparin 30 mg x2
TKROpen
Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Warfarin versus Intermittent pneumatic compression
Francis, 1992
Warfarin
versus
IPC
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 6–8 days
Paiement, 1987
Warfarin
versus
IPC
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 12 days
Bailey, 1991
Warfarin
versus
IPC
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 5–7 days
Kaempffe, 1991
Warfarin
versus
IPC
THR or TKR (stratified)Open
Follow-up duration: At least 2 months
Warfarin versus Logiparin
Hull, 1993
Warfarin
versus
Logiparin 75 anti-Xa IU /kg x1
THR or TKR (stratified)double blind
Follow-up duration: Day 14 or discharge
Warfarin versus no treatment
Pinto, 1970
Warfarin
versus
No treatment
Hip surgeryOpen
Follow-up duration: > 3 weeks
Hume, 1973
Warfarin
versus
No treatment
THROpen
Follow-up duration: Discharge
Morris, 1976
Warfarin
versus
No treatment
HFSOpen
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Powers, 1989
Warfarin
versus
No treatment
HFSOpen
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Warfarin versus placebo
Myrhe, 1969
Wwarfarin
versus
Placebo
HFSdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Warfarin versus Sudoxicam
Hume, 1973
Warfarin
versus
Sudoxicam
THRsingle blind
Follow-up duration: Discharge
Warfarin versus unfractionated heparin
Hume, 1973
Warfarin
versus
UFH 5000 x3
THROpen
Follow-up duration: Discharge
Barber, 1977
Warfarin
versus
UFH 5000 x2
THROpen
Follow-up duration: 11–14 days
ximelagatran versus Dalteparin
METHRO I, 2002
Melagatran 1–4 mg s.c. immediately before surgery, melagatran at 20.00 hours, then ximelagatran 6–24 mg orally b.d. for 6–9 days
versus
Dalteparin 5000 IU o.d., started evening before surgery for 6–9 days
adults undergoing hip or knee replacementopen
Follow-up duration: 6–9 days
Swedish
METHRO II, 2002
Melagatran 1–3 mg s.c. immediately before surgery,melagatran same day, then ximelagatran 8–24 mg orally b.d. for 7–10 days
versus
Dalteparin 5000 IU o.d., started evening before surgery for 7–10 days
undergoing hip or knee replacementdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 7–10 days
ximelagatran versus Enoxaparin
Platinum (Colwell), 2003
Ximelagatran 24 mg orally b.d., starting at least 12 h after surgery for 7–12 days
versus
Enoxaparin 30 mg s.c. b.d.,starting at least 12 h after surgery for 7–12 days
adults undergoing hip replacementdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 7–12 days
USA, Canada, Israel, Mexico,Argentina, South Africa
METHRO III, 2002
Melagatran 3 mg s.c. 4–12h after surgery, then ximelagatran24 mg orally b.d. for 7–10 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg s.c. o.d. 12 h before surgery for 7–10 days
hip or knee replacementdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 8–11 days
Europe, South Africa
Phase II (Heit), 2001
Ximelagatran 8, 12, 18 or 24 mgorally b.d., at least 12 h after surgery for 6–12 days
versus
Enoxaparin 30 mg s.c. b.d.,starting at least 12 h after surgery for 6–12 days
adults (age>18 years and weight at least 40 kg) undergoing knee replacementsdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 6–12 days
North American
EXPRESS, 2003
Melagatran 2 mg s.c. up to 30 min before surgery, then melagatran 3 mg at least 8 hafter surgery, then ximelagatran 24 mg orally b.d. for 8–11 days
versus
Enoxaparin 40 mg s.c. o.d.,starting 12 h before surgery for 8–11 days
hip or knee replacementdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 8–11 days
Europe