thrombosis prevention 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	THR	Open Follow-up duration: 6 weeks
Acenocoumarol versus unfractionated heparin
van Geloven, 1977	Acenocoumarol versus UFH 4000 ·x2	THR	double blind Follow-up duration: NA
antixarin versus unfractionated heparin
Limmer, 1994	Antixarin 2500 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	General surgery	Open
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 surgery	double 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 days	double-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 replacement	double 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 surgery	double 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 surgery	double blind Follow-up duration: 10-14 days 14 countries
ardeparin versus placebo
Levine, 1996	ardeparin 50/kgx2 +elastic stockings versus Placebo+elastic stockings	Knee	double 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 surgery	Blind
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 replacement	open Follow-up duration: 1 weeks
aspirin versus placebo
MRC, 1972	A600 versus placebo	general surgery	double-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 fractures	double-blind
Powers , 1976	A1300 versus placebo	traumatic orthopaedic surgery
Erfurt-B , 1979	A1500 versus placebo	traumatic orthopaedic surgery	double-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 fracture	Double 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 arthroplasty	Double blind Follow-up duration: 35 days New Zealand
Aspirin versus placebo
Stockholm-I, 1975	Aspirin 2000mg daily versus placebo	elective surgery of the hip	double 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 replacement	double-blind Follow-up duration: 1 weeks
McKenna-I, 1980	Aspirin 975mg or 3900mg daily versus placebo	total knee replacement	double-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 fractures	open
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 infarction	double-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	Patients who were hospitalized for acute medical illnesses and with an elevated d-dimer level	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 department	open 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 leg	open 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 surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 1 month
Sasahara, 1986	Certoparin 3000 + DHE versus UFH 10 000 units +DHE	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 7 days
Voigt, 1986	Certoparin 3000 + DHE versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 10 days
Welzel, 1988	Certoparin 2500 + DHE versus UFH 10 000 units+DHE	Abdominal surgery	Open Follow-up duration: 7 days
Kakkar, 1989	Certoparin 3000 + DHE versus UFH 10 000 units+DHE	Abdominal surgery	Blind
Adolf, 1989	Certoparin 3000 versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 1 month
Heilmann, 1989	Certoparin 3000 versus UFH 15 000 units	Gynaecological surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 10 days
Baumgartner, 1989	Certoparin 3000 + DHE versus UFH 5 000 units+DHE	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 10 days
Hoffmann and Largiade, 1990	Certoparin 3000 + DHE versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	NA
Koppenhagen, 1990	Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind
Schielke, 1991	Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units + DHE versus UFH 10 000 units + DHE	Abdominal surgery	Open
Koppenhagen, 1992	Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind
Hoffmann and Largiader, 1992	Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominothoracic surgery	Blind
Heilmann, 1997	Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	Gynaecological and breast surgery	Blind
Haas, 1999	Certoparin 3000 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	General surgery	Blind
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 fracture	double blind Follow-up duration: 6 days
Lassen, 1988	certoparin 3000+0.5mg DHE, x1 versus Placebo	Elective hip	double 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 surgery	open 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 surgery	double-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 replacement	double 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 replacement	double 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 disease	double blind Follow-up duration: 21 days
Jorgensen, 1989	dalteparin 5000 x1 versus Placebo	Hip fracture	double blind Follow-up duration: 9 days
Torholm, 1991	dalteparin 5000x1 versus Placebo	Elective hip	double blind Follow-up duration: 9 days
Ockelford , 1989	Dalteparin 2500 anti-Xa units versus Placebo	general surgery	Blind
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 surgery	double-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 patients	double-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 infarction	open 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 surgery	NA
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 surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 1 month
Onarheim, 1986	Dalteparin 5000 versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind 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 surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 30 days
Koller, 1986	Dalteparin 2500 versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 30 days
Fricker, 1988	Dalteparin 5000 versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominopelvic surgery	Open Follow-up duration: 1-2 months
Bergqvist, 1988	Dalteparin 5000 versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 1 month
Caen, 1988	Dalteparin 2500 versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 1 month
Borstad, 1988	Dalteparin 5000 versus UFH 10 000 units	Gynaecological surgery	Blind
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 surgery	Blind
Hartl, 1990	Dalteparin 2500 versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: > 7 days
Borstad, 1992	Dalteparin 2500 anti Xa units versus UFH 10 000 units	Gynaecological surgery	Blind
Kakkar, 1993	Dalteparin 2500 anti Xa units versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind
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 replacement	double 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 surgery	double blind Europe
dipyridamol versus no treatment
Morris-A , 1977	dipyridamole versus control	elderly patients with hip fractures	open
dipyridamol + ASA versus placebo
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
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 hip	open 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 patients	double-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 unit	double blind Follow-up duration: 90 days
MEDENOX, 1999	Enoxaparin 20 mg or 40 mg once daily, 6–14 days versus placebo	Acute decompensated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with mechanical ventilation	double blind Follow-up duration: 6-14 days
enoxaparin versus placebo
Kalodiki, 1996	enoxaparin 4000x1 versus Placebo	Elective hip	double blind Follow-up duration: discharge (8-12 days )
LeGagneux , 1987	Enoxaparin 6000 anti-Xa units versus Placebo	prostatectomy surgery	Blind
Leclerc, 1991	Enoxaparin 3000 x2 versus Placebo	Knee	double blind Follow-up duration: 14 days
Samama, 1997	enoxaparin 4000x1+elastic stockings versus Placebo+elastic stockings	Elective hip	double blind Follow-up duration: 8-12 days
Turpie, 1986	Enoxaparin 3000 x2 versus Placebo	Elective hip	double 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 illness	double-blind Follow-up duration: 10 days
Lechler, 1996	enoxaparin 40 mg versus unfractionated heparin (Ca-heparin), 3 x 5,000 U)	hospitalized medical patients	double-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 failure	open Follow-up duration: 10 +/- 2 days Germany
enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin
Samama 2, 1988	Enoxaparin 4000 versus UFH 15 000 units	General surgery	Open Follow-up duration: 7 days
Samama 1, 1988	Enoxaparin 2000 versus UFH 15 000 units	General surgery	Open 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 surgery	Open 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 surgery	Blind
Gazzaniga (ISG), 1993	Enoxaparin 2000 anti Xa units versus UFH 10 000 units	General and vascular surgery	Open
Nurmohamed, 1995	Enoxaparin 2000 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	General surgery	Blind
McLeod (Canadian), 1995	Enoxaparin 4000 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	Colorectal surgery	Blind
Gonzalez, 1996	Bemiparin 2500 anti Xa units versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Blind
ENOXACAN, 1997	Enoxaparin 4000 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominopelvic surgery	Blind
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 surgery	double 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 duration	Open, 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 Mobility	double-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 ligament	double-blind Follow-up duration: <=28 days Austria
Flurbiprofen versus no treatment
Mocris-C , 1977	Flurbiprofen versus control	elderly patients with hip fractures	open
fluxum versus placebo
Valle , 1988	Parnaparin 3200 anti-Xa units versus Placebo	general surgery	Blind
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 limbs	single-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 replacement	open, 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 surgery	double 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 surgery	double 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 surgery	double 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 surgery	double 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 surgery	double 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 replacement	double 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 surgery	double 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 patients	double 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 surgery	double blind Follow-up duration: 10 days US
Footpump versus LMWH
Stone, 1996	intermittent pneumatic calf compression versus Enoxaparin	total hip replacement	open
Warwick, 1998	A-V Impulse System foot pump versus LMWH	primary total hip replacement	open 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 arthroplasty	open (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 arthroplasty	open
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 surgery	open
Wilson, 1992	versus	Elective knee remplacement	open
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 surgery	open
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 patients	open, 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	stroke	open (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 spine	double-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 hip	double-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 remplacement	open
HAAS II, 1990	versus	elective knee remplacement	open
McKenna (vs aspirin), 1980	versus	elective knee remplacement	open
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 surgery	open
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 old	open 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 surgery	open
paiement, 1987	versus	elective hip replacement	open
Kaempffe, 1991	versus	elective hip & knee replacement	open
IPC + aspirin versus aspirin
Hull 2 (+asp), 1979	versus	patients undergoing elective knee surgery	open
Hull (+asp), 1979	versus	patients undergoing elective knee surgery	open
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 anesthesia	open
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 patients	open 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 endarterectomy	open Follow-up duration: hospital stay
Fordyce, 1992	venous foot pump (A-V Impulse System) versus control	elective hip replacement	open
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).	neurosurgery	open
Turpie, 1989	graduated compression stockings plus intermittent pneumatic compression versus graduated compression stockings alone	neurosurgery	open Follow-up duration: 14 days
Wautrecht, 1996	versus	neurosurgery	open
Caprini, 1983	versus	general surgery	open
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	stroke	open
IPC + GCS versus LMWH
Norgren, 1998	IPCD/FID + GCS versus LMWH	elective knee remplacement	open
IPC + GCS versus UFH
Niolaides, 1983	IPCD + GCS versus UFH	general surgery	open
Santori, 1994	IPC + GCS versus UFH	elective hip replacement	open
IPC + GCS +LMWH versus GCS +LMWH
Dickinson, 1998	sequential compression device +enoxaparin (+ GCS) versus enoxaparin (+GCS)	neurosurgery, patients with brain tumors	open 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 surgery	open
Siragusa (H), 1994	versus		open
IPC – sequential compression versus control
Blackshear à exclure, 1987	Sequential external pneumatic compression versus control	abdominal or thoracic surgery	open
Hull II, 1990	sequential intermittent calf and thigh compression versus no prophylaxis	patients undergoing total hip replacement	open
Fisher, 1995	pneumatic sequential leg compression devices versus no specific form of prophylaxis	orthopaedic trauma patients with hip and pelvic fractures	open
Turple II, 1979	intermittent sequential calf compression versus	patients with intracranial disease	open
Knudson, 1994	sequential gradient pneumatic leg compression versus control	trauma patients	open
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 anesthetic	open 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 old	open (blind assessement) Follow-up duration: NA United States
IPC – single compression versus control
Prasad, 1982	pneumatic compression of the calf versus No Prophylaxis	elderly hemiplegics	open
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 procedures	open
Clark, 1974	Pneumatic compression of the calf versus	abdominal or thoracic surgery	open
Clarke-Pearson I, 1984	versus		open
Clarke-Pearson II, 1984	versus	abdominal or thoracic surgery	open
Coe, 1978	low-dose heparin and external pneumatic compression (EPC) of the calves versus no treatment	patients undergoing open urological operations	open
Hills, 1972	intermittent pneumatic compression of calf versus	abdominal or thoracic surgery	open
Gallus, 1983	preventive intermittent calf compression versus no prophylaxis	elective hip replacement	open 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 operations	open Follow-up duration: until patients fully mobilized
Bynke, 1987	versus	neurosurgery	open
Skillman, 1978	external pneumatic compression (EPC) of the calves versus no specific form of prophylaxis	patients undergoing neurosurgical operative procedures	open Follow-up duration: NA
Turpie I, 1977	intermittent pneumatic compression of the calf versus	patients with intracranial disease	open
Hull I, 1979	intermittent pulsatile elastic stockings versus	patients undergoing elective knee surgery	open
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 remplacement	open
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 years	double-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 inpatients	double-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 arthroscopy	open (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 cast	open 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 hip	open 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 ventilation	double 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, cancer	double blind Follow-up duration: <=21 days
nadroparin versus placebo
Sourmelis, 1995	nadroparin 3075x1 preop, 6150x1 post op versus Placebo	Hip fracture	double blind Follow-up duration: 10-12 days
Pezzuoli, 1989	Nadroparin 2850 anti-Xa units versus Placebo	general surgery	Blind
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 surgery	Blind Follow-up duration: 10 days
EFS, 1988	Nadroparin 2850 versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Open 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 surgery	Open
Barbui, 1990	Nadroparin 2850 anti Xa units versus UFH 10 000 units	General surgery	Open
Eurin, 1994	Nadroparin 2850 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominopelvic surgery	Open
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 surgery	Open
Salcuni, 1988	Parnaparin 3200 versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Open
Verardi, 1989	Parnaparin 6400 versus UFH 10 000 units	Abdominal/urological surgery	NA
Garcea, 1992	Parnaparin 3200 anti Xa units versus UFH 15 000 units	Abdominal surgery	Open
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 disease	double blind Follow-up duration: <10 days
Phenindione versus no treatment
Eskeland, 1966	Phenindione versus No treatment	HFS	Open Follow-up duration: 3 months
Hamilton, 1970	Phenindione versus No treatment	HFS	Open 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 arthroscopy	open (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 tendon	double-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 surgery	Blind
rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin
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 arthroplasty	double 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 arthroplasty	double 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 replacement	double 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 versus placebo
MARINER, 2018 NCT02111564	once-daily rivaroxaban at a dose of 10 mg (with the dose adjusted for renal insufficiency) , begun at hospital discharge and continued for 45 days versus placebo	high-risk medical patients : medically ill patients who were at increasedrisk for venous thromboembolism on the basis of a modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE) score of 4 or higher (scores range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating a higher risk of venous thromboembolism) or a score of 2 or 3 plus a plasma d-dimer level of more than twice the upper limit of the normal range (defined according to local laboratory criteria)	double blind
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 replacement	double 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 surgery	double 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 surgery	Blind 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 hip	double 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 surgery	Blind
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 infection	open 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 infarction	double 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 Immobilization	open 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 TKR	Open Follow-up duration: 3 months
Heit, 1997	Warfarin versus Ardeparin 25, 35, 50 anti-Xa U /kg x2	TKR	double 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	HFS	Open Follow-up duration: 3 months
Warfarin versus Dalteparin
Francis, 1997	Warfarin versus Dalteparin 5000 anti-Xa IU x1	THR	Open Follow-up duration: Day 7 ± 2
Hull, 2000	Warfarin versus Dalteparin 5000 anti-Xa IU x1	THR	double blind Follow-up duration: Day 6 ± 2
Warfarin versus Danaparoid
Gerhart, 1991	Warfarin versus Danaparoid 750 U x2	HFS	Open Follow-up duration: 9 days
van Comp, 1998	Warfarin versus Danaparoid 750 U x2	THR	Open Follow-up duration: 3 months
Warfarin versus Dextran
Harris, 1972	Warfarin versus Dextran 40	THR	Open Follow-up duration: NA
Barber, 1977	Warfarin versus Dextran 70	THR	Open 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	HFS	double blind Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Warfarin versus Enoxaparin
Leclerc, 1996	Warfarin versus Enoxaparin 30 mg x2	TKR	double blind Follow-up duration: 6 months
Colwell, 1999	Warfarin versus Enoxaparin 30 mg x2	THR	Open Follow-up duration: 3 months
Fitzgerald, 2001	Warfarin versus Enoxaparin 30 mg x2	TKR	Open Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Warfarin versus Intermittent pneumatic compression
Francis, 1992	Warfarin versus IPC	THR	Open Follow-up duration: 6–8 days
Paiement, 1987	Warfarin versus IPC	THR	Open Follow-up duration: 12 days
Bailey, 1991	Warfarin versus IPC	THR	Open 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 surgery	Open Follow-up duration: > 3 weeks
Hume, 1973	Warfarin versus No treatment	THR	Open Follow-up duration: Discharge
Morris, 1976	Warfarin versus No treatment	HFS	Open Follow-up duration: 3 months
Powers, 1989	Warfarin versus No treatment	HFS	Open Follow-up duration: 3 months
Warfarin versus placebo
Myrhe, 1969	Wwarfarin versus Placebo	HFS	double blind Follow-up duration: 3 weeks
Warfarin versus Sudoxicam
Hume, 1973	Warfarin versus Sudoxicam	THR	single blind Follow-up duration: Discharge
Warfarin versus unfractionated heparin
Hume, 1973	Warfarin versus UFH 5000 x3	THR	Open Follow-up duration: Discharge
Barber, 1977	Warfarin versus UFH 5000 x2	THR	Open 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 replacement	open 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 replacement	double-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 replacement	double-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 replacement	double-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 replacements	double-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 replacement	double-blind Follow-up duration: 8–11 days Europe