Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 337

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized clinical trial of postoperative fondaparinux versus perioperative dalteparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism in high-risk abdominal surgery

Open access
Agnelli, G, Bergqvist, D, Cohen, A T, Gallus, A S, Gent, M·2005·British Journal of Surgery

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to assess whether the synthetic factor Xa inhibitor fondaparinux reduced the risk of venous thromboembolism more efficiently than the low molecular weight heparin dalteparin in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Methods: In a double-blind double-dummy randomized study, patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery under general anaesthesia received once-daily subcutaneous injections of fondaparinux 2·5 mg or dalteparin 5000 units for 5–9 days. Fondaparinux was started 6 h after surgery. The first two doses of dalteparin, 2500 units each, were given 2 h before surgery and 12 h after the preoperative administration. The primary outcome measure was a composite of deep vein thrombosis detected by bilateral venography and symptomatic, confirmed deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism up until day 10. The main safety outcome measure was major bleeding during treatment. Results: Among 2048 patients evaluable for efficacy, the rate of venous thromboembolism was 4·6 per cent (47 of 1027) with fondaparinux compared with 6·1 per cent (62 of 1021) with dalteparin, a relative risk reduction of 24·6 (95 per cent confidence interval −9·0 to 47·9) per cent (P = 0·144), which met the predetermined criterion for non-inferiority of fondaparinux. Major bleeding was observed in 49 (3·4 per cent) of 1433 patients given fondaparinux and 34 (2·4 per cent) of 1425 given dalteparin (P = 0·122). Conclusion: Postoperative fondaparinux was at least as effective as perioperative dalteparin in patients undergoing high-risk abdominal surgery.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bjs.5154

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 337

Metadata

Authors
Agnelli, G., Bergqvist, D., Cohen, A. T., Gallus, A. S., & Gent, M.
Venue
British Journal of Surgery
Published
2005-09-20
Volume
92
Issue
10
Pages
1212-1220
ISSN
  • 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2168
OpenAlex
W1990154448
Cited by
337
References
19
FWCI
22.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.