Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Pentasaccharides for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

References to studies included in this review

ACT2545 {published data only}

Anon. A multicentre dose finding study of once daily injection of natural pentasaccharide for the prevention of deep vein thrombosis after total hip replacement. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL : www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/ACT2545#rs (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Turpie AG. Pentasaccharide (org31540/sr90107a) clinical trials update: lessons for practice. American Heart Journal 2001;142(2 Suppl):S9‐15. CENTRAL

APOLLO {published data only}

Anon. Safety study of fondaparinux sodium to prevent venous thromboembolic events (APOLLO). A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, parallel group trial to demonstrate the efficacy of fondaparinux sodium in association with intermittent pneumatic compression versus intermittent pneumatic compression used alone for the prevention of venous thromboembolic events in subjects at increased risk undergoing major abdominal surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2011; Vol. Study No: AR3103414. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/103414 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Del Priore G, Herzog TJ, Bauer KA, Caprini JA, Comp P, Gent M, et al. Fondaparinux combined with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) versus IPC alone in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after major abdominal surgery: results of the APOLLO study. Gynecologic Oncology2006; Vol. 101:S21. CENTRAL
Turpie AG, Bauer K, Caprini J, Comp P, Gent M, Muntz J. Fondaparinux combined with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) versus IPC alone in the prevention of VTE after major abdominal surgery: results of the APOLLO study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2005;3(Suppl 1):Abstract number: P1046. CENTRAL
Turpie AG, Bauer KA, Caprini JA, Comp PC, Gent M, Muntz JE, et al. Fondaparinux combined with intermittent pneumatic compression vs. intermittent pneumatic compression alone for prevention of venous thromboembolism after abdominal surgery: a randomized, double‐blind comparison. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2007;5(9):1854‐61. CENTRAL
Turpie AGG, Bauer KA, Caprini JA, Comp PP, Gent M, Muntz JE. Fondaparinux combined with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) versus IPC alone in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after major abdominal surgery: the randomized APOLLO study. Blood 2005;106(11):Abstract 279. CENTRAL

AR3106116 {published data only}

Anon. Clinical evaluation of GSK576428 (fondaparinux sodium) in prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after abdominal surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/AR3106116 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Sakon M, Tsukamoto T, Kobayashi T, Fujita S, Kawashima T, Morito M. Clinical evaluation of fondaparinux for prevention of venous thromboembolism after abdominal surgery. A randomized open‐label study of fondaparinux and intermittent pneumatic compression as a benchmark. Rinsho Iyaku ‐ Journal of Clinical Therapeutics & Medicines 2008;24(7):679‐89. CENTRAL

ARTEMIS {published data only}

Anon. A multinational, randomized, double‐blind comparison of once daily subcutaneous fondaparinux sodium with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolic events in acutely ill medical patients (ARTEMIS). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/104619 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Cohen AT. Thromboprophylaxis with fondaparinux in acutely ill medical patients aged 75 years or more. The Hematology Journal 2004;5(Suppl 2):105. CENTRAL
Cohen AT. Thromboprophylaxis with fondaparinux in acutely ill medical patients with moderate renal impairment. The Hematology Journal 2004;5(Suppl 2):54. CENTRAL
Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS. Fondaparinux for the prevention of VTE in acutely ill medical patients. Blood 2003;102(11):15a‐Abstract 42. CENTRAL
Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS, Lassen MR, Prins MH, Tomkowski W, et al. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial. BMJ 2006;332(7537):325‐9. CENTRAL
Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS, Lassen MR, Prins MH, Tomkowski W, et al. Thromboprophylaxis with fondaparinux in acutely Ill medical patients aged 75 years or more, or with moderate renal impairment. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2005;3(1):Abstract number: P2303. CENTRAL
Cohen AT, Gallus AS, Lassen MR, Tomkowski W, Turpie AGG, Davidson BL, et al. Fondaparinux vs. placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients (artemis). Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2003;1(Suppl 1 July):Abstract P2046. CENTRAL
Wilmott R, Cohen AT. Benefit of fondaparinux in medical patients: a subgroup analysis. 16th European Chapter Congress of the International Union of Angiology, 2005 Oct; Glasgow, UK. CENTRAL
Wilmott R, Cohen AT. Thromboprophylaxis with fondaparinux in acutely ill medical patients aged 75 years or more, or with moderate renal impairment. 16th European Chapter Congress of the International Union of Angiology, 2005 Oct; Glasgow, UK. CENTRAL

Bern 2015 {published data only}

Bern MM, Hazel D, Deeran E, Richmond JR, Ward DM, Spitz DJ, et al. Low dose compared to variable dose warfarin and to fondaparinux as prophylaxis for thromboembolism after elective hip or knee replacement surgery; a randomized, prospective study. Thrombosis Journal 2015;13(32):672‐83. [DOI: 10.1186/s12959‐015‐0062‐0]CENTRAL

CALISTO {published data only}

Anonymous. Evaluation of fondaparinux (also called ARIXTRA) 2.5 mg subcutaneously once daily for the treatment of superficial thrombophlebitis (also known as superficial vein thrombosis). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2013. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/ART108053 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Decousus H, Prandoni P, Mismetti P, Bauersachs RM, Boda Z, Brenner B, et al. Fondaparinux for the treatment of superficial‐vein thrombosis in the legs. New England Journal of Medicine 2010;363(13):1222‐32. CENTRAL
Leizorovicz A, Becker F, Buchmuller A, Quere I, Prandoni P, Decousus H, et al. Clinical relevance of symptomatic superficial‐vein thrombosis extension: lessons from the CALISTO study. Blood 2013;122:1724‐9. CENTRAL

Cho 2013 {published data only}

Cho KY, Kim KI, Khurana S, Bae DK, Jin W. Is routine chemoprophylaxis necessary for prevention of venous thromboembolism following knee arthroplasty in a low incidence population?. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2013;133(4):551‐9. CENTRAL

DRI4090 {published data only}

Anon. A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, dose response study of subcutaneous (Org31540/SR90107A) in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective total hip replacement surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/DRI4090 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Fuji T, Fujita S, Ochi T. Fondaparinux prevents venous thromboembolism after joint replacement surgery in Japanese patients. International Orthopaedics 2008;32(4):443‐51. CENTRAL

DRI4757 {published data only}

Anonymous. A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel group, dose response study of subcutaneous (Org31540/SR90107A) in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective total knee replacement surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008; Vol. Study No.: DRI4757. [URL: http://www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/DRI4757?study_ids=DRI4757#rs (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Fuji T, Fujita S, Ochi T. Fondaparinux prevents venous thromboembolism after joint replacement surgery in Japanese patients. International Orthopaedics 2008;32(4):443‐51. CENTRAL

EFFORT {published data only}

Steele KE, Canner J, Prokopowicz G, Verde F, Beselman A, Wyse R, et al. The EFFORT trial. Preoperative enoxaparin versus postoperative fondaparinux for thromboprophylaxis in bariatric surgical patients: a randomized double‐blind pilot trial. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 2015;11(3):672‐83. CENTRAL

EPHESUS {published data only}

Anon. European Pentasaccharide Hip Elective Surgery Study (EPHESUS). A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind comparison of once daily subcutaneous (Org31540/SR90107A) with enoxaparin for the prevention of deep vein thrombosis or symptomatic pulmonary embolism in patients undergoing elective hip replacement surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/63118 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Borja J, Olivella P, Curto J. Fondaparinux versus enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism. Lancet 2002;360(9345):1603‐4. CENTRAL
Lassen MR. Bauer K, Eriksson BI, Turpie AG, European Pentasaccharide Elective Surgery Study (EPHESUS) Steering Committee. Postoperative fondaparinux versus preoperative enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism in elective hip‐replacement surgery: a randomised double‐blind comparison. Lancet 2002;359(9319):1715‐20. CENTRAL

FONDACAST {published data only}

Anon. FONDAparinux in patients with a plaster CAST (FONDACAST). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2011. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/109350 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Samama CM, Lecoules N, Kierzek G, Claessens YE, Riou B, Rosencher N, et al. Comparison of fondaparinux with low molecular weight heparin for venous thromboembolism prevention in patients requiring rigid or semi‐rigid immobilization for isolated non‐surgical below‐knee injury. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2013;11(10):1833‐43. CENTRAL
Samama CM, Lecoules N, Kierzek G, Claessens YE, Riou B, Rosencher N, et al. Comparison of fondaparinux with low‐molecular‐weight heparin for venous thromboembolism prevention in patients requiring rigid or semi‐rigid immobilization for isolated non‐surgical below‐knee injury. Annales Francaises de Medecine d'Urgence 2014;4(3):153‐66. CENTRAL
Samama CM, Riou B, Roy P‐M, Sautet A, Mismetti P, FONDACAST Study Group. Prevention of venous thromboembolism after an isolated, non‐surgical below‐knee injury. Benefit/risk of fondaparinux vs. low molecular weight heparin: the Fondacast study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2013;11(Suppl S3):5. CENTRAL
Samama CMR. Subgroup analysis of the FONDACAST study comparing fondaparinux to low‐molecular‐weight heparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after an isolated, non‐surgical below‐knee injury. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2013;11 (Suppl S2):88. CENTRAL

Fuji 2015 {published and unpublished data}

Fuji T, Fujita S, Kawai Y, Abe Y, Kimura T, Fukuzawa M, et al. A randomized, open‐label trial of edoxaban in Japanese patients with severe renal impairment undergoing lower‐limb orthopedic surgery. Thrombosis Journal 2015;13:6. [DOI: 10.1186/s12959‐014‐0034‐9]CENTRAL

Kolluri 2016 {published data only}

Kolluri R, Plessa AL, Sanders MC, Singh NK, Lucore C. A randomized study of the safety and efficacy of fondaparinux versus placebo in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. American Heart Journal 2016;171(1):1‐6. CENTRAL

L‐8541 {published data only}

Anon. Arixtra VTE Prevention Study ‐ Fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Chinese patients undergoing elective knee replacement, hip surgery or a revision of components. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/L‐8541 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL

L‐8635 {published data only}

Anon. Fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in Taiwanese patients undergoing elective knee replacement. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/L‐8635 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL

Li 2015 {published and unpublished data}

Li B, Wang K, Zhao X, Lin C, Sun H. Comparison of fondaparinux sodium and low molecular weight heparin in the treatment of hypercoagulability secondary to traumatic infection. Chinese Journal of Traumatology 2015;18:147‐9. CENTRAL

PEGASUS {published data only}

Agnelli G, Bergqvist D, Cohen A, Gallus A, Gent M. A randomized double‐blind study to compare the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux with dalteparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after high‐risk abdominal surgery: the Pegasus study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis2003; Vol. 1, issue Suppl 1:Abstract OC006. CENTRAL
Agnelli G, Bergqvist D, Cohen A, Gallus AS, Gent M. A randomized double‐blind study to compare the efficacy and safety of postoperative fondaparinux (Arixtra) and preoperative dalteparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism after high‐risk abdominal surgery: the PEGASUS study. Blood 2003;102(11 Pt 1):Abstract 40. CENTRAL
Agnelli G, Bergqvist D, Cohen AT, Gallus AS, Gent M, PEGASUS Investigators. Randomized clinical trial of postoperative fondaparinux versus perioperative dalteparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism in high‐risk abdominal surgery. British Journal of Surgery 2005;92(10):1212‐20. CENTRAL
Anon. A multicenter, multinational, randomized, double‐blind study to compare the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux sodium (Org31540/SR90107A) with dalteparin (Fragmin) in the prevention of venous thromboembolic events in high‐risk abdominal surgery (PEGASUS). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2005. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/EFC3557 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL

PENTAMAKS {published data only}

Anon. A multicenter, multinational, randomized, double‐blind comparison of subcutaneous (Org31540/SR90107A) with enoxaparin in the prevention of deep vein thrombosis and symptomatic pulmonary embolism after elective major knee surgery or a revision (PENTAMAKS). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/095‐002 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Bauer K. The PENTAMAKS Study. Comparison of the first synthetic factor Xa inhibitor with low molecular weight heparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after elective major knee surgery. Blood 2000;96:490a. CENTRAL
Bauer KA, Eriksson BI, Lassen MR, Turpie AGG, for the Steering Committee of the Pentasaccharide in Major Knee Surgery Study. Fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective major knee surgery. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;345(18):1305‐10. CENTRAL
Warkentin TE, Cook RJ, Marder VJ, Sheppard JA, Moore JC, Eriksson BI, et al. Anti‐platelet factor 4/heparin antibodies in orthopedic surgery patients receiving antithrombotic prophylaxis with fondaparinux or enoxaparin. Blood 2005;106(12):3791‐6. CENTRAL

PENTATHLON {published data only}

Turpie AG. Pentasaccharide (Org31540/SR90107A) clinical trials update: lessons for practice. American Heart Journal 2001;142(2 Suppl):S9‐15. CENTRAL
Turpie AG, Gallus AS, Hoek JA, Pentasaccharide Investigators. A synthetic pentasaccharide for the prevention of deep‐vein thrombosis after total hip replacement. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;344(9):619‐25. CENTRAL
Warkentin TE, Cook RJ, Marder VJ, Sheppard JI, Moore JC, Eriksson BI, et al. Anti‐platelet factor 4/heparin antibodies in orthopedic surgery patients receiving antithrombotic prophylaxis with fondaparinux or enoxaparin. Blood 2005;106(12):3791‐6. CENTRAL

PENTATHLON 2000 {published data only}

Anon. A multicenter, multinational, randomized, double‐blind comparison of subcutaneous (Org31540/SR90107A) with enoxaparin in the prevention of deep vein thrombosis and symptomatic pulmonary embolism after elective hip replacement or a revision. PENTATHLON 2000. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/EFC2442 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Turpie AG. The PENTATHALON 2000 Study: comparison of the first synthetic factor Xa inhibitor with low molecular weight heparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism. Blood 2000;96(491A):Abstract A2112. CENTRAL
Turpie AG, Bauer KA, Eriksson BI, Lassen MR, PENTATHALON 2000 Study Steering Committee. Postoperative fondaparinux versus postoperative enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective hip‐replacement surgery: a randomised double‐blind trial. Lancet 2002;359(9319):1721‐6. CENTRAL

PENTHIFRA {published data only}

Anon. A multicenter, multinational, randomized double‐blind comparison study of subcutaneous (Org31540/SR90107A) versus enoxaparin 40 mg o.d. in the prevention of deep vein thrombosis and symptomatic pulmonary embolism in hip fracture surgery (PENTHIFRA). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/EFC2698 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Eriksson B. The PENTHIFRA Study. Comparison of the first synthetic Factor Xa inhibitor with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hip fracture surgery. Blood 2000;96(490A):Abstract 2110. CENTRAL
Eriksson BI, Bauer KA, Lassen MR, Turpie AGG, for the Steering Committee of the Pentasaccharide in Hip‐Fracture Surgery Study. Fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip‐fracture surgery. The New England Journal of Medicine 2001;345(18):1298‐304. CENTRAL

PENTHIFRA PLUS {published data only}

Anon. A multicenter, multinational, randomized, double‐blind study of fondaparinux sodium (Org31540/SR90107A) versus placebo for the prolonged prevention of VTE in hip fracture surgery (PENTIHFRA PLUS). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/EFC4582?study_ids=EFC4582#rs (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Bauer KA, Eriksson BI, Lassen MR, Turpie AGG. No episode of thrombocytopenia after four‐week administration of fondaparinux, a new synthetic and selective inhibitor of factor Xa, in the PENTHIFRA‐PLUS study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2003;1(Suppl 1):P2050. CENTRAL
Dobesh PP. Novel concepts: emerging data and the role of extended prophylaxis following hip fracture surgery. American Journal of Health‐System Pharmacy 2003;60(22 Suppl 7):S15‐9. CENTRAL
Eriksson BI. A multicenter, randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind study of fondaparinux for the prolonged prevention of venous thromboembolism in hip fracture surgery. Abstracts of the Sicot/Sirot XXII World Congress2002:318. CENTRAL
Eriksson BI, Lassen MR. Consistency of efficacy of extended thromboprophylaxis with fondaparinux (Arixtra) in prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hip fracture surgery according to different composite efficacy endpoints: the PENTHIFRA‐PLUS study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2003;1(Suppl 1):Abstract P2064. CENTRAL
Eriksson BI, Lassen MR, Colwell CW. Efficacy of fondaparinux for thromboprophylaxis in hip fracture patients. Journal of Arthroplasty 2004;19(7 Suppl 2):78‐81. CENTRAL
Eriksson BI, Lassen MR, PENTasaccharide in HIp‐FRActure Surgery Plus (PENTHIFRA Plus) Investigators. Duration of prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism with fondaparinux after hip fracture surgery: a multicenter, randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind study. Archives of Internal Medicine 2003;163(11):1337‐42. CENTRAL
Lassen M, Bauer KA, Eriksson BI, Turpie AGG. Absence of transaminase increase after 4‐week administration of fondaparinux (Arixtra) a new synthetic and selective inhibitor of factor Xa in the PENTHIFRA‐PLUS study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2003;1(Suppl 1):Abstract number P2052. CENTRAL
Lassen MR, Eriksson BI. Efficacy of fondaparinux (Arixtra) in extended thromboprophylaxis in hip fracture surgery is irrespective of patient and surgical characteristics: subgroup analyses of the Penthifra‐Plus study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2003;1(Suppl 1):Abstract P2062. CENTRAL

Shen 2014 {published and unpublished data}

Shen Y, Zhong M, Tan L. Fondaparinux versus low molecular weight heparin following esophagectomy: results from a randomized and controlled trial. Chest 2014;145(3_Meeting Abstracts):535D. CENTRAL

Yokote 2011 {published data only}

Yokote R, Matsubara M, Hirasawa N, Hagio S, Ishii K, Takata C. Is routine chemical thromboprophylaxis after total hip replacement really necessary in a Japanese population?. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British Volume 2011;93(2):251‐6. CENTRAL

References to studies excluded from this review

ACT1840 {published data only}

Anon. A multicentre pilot study of natural pentasaccharide (SR90107A /Org31540) for the prevention of deep venous thrombosis after total hip replacement. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/ACT1840 (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL

Amadeus 2008 {published data only}

Amadeus Investigators, Bousser MG, Bouthier J, Büller HR, Cohen AT, Crijns H, Davidson BL, et al. Comparison of idraparinux with vitamin K antagonists for prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomised, open‐label, non‐inferiority trial. Lancet 2008;371(9609):315‐21. [DOI: 10.1016/S0140‐6736(08)60168‐3]CENTRAL

AR3106206 {published data only}

Anon. Clinical evaluation of GSK576428 (fondaparinux sodium) in the treatment of acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PE). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2009. [NCT00981409; URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/106206?study_ids=AR3106206#ps (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL

AR3106333 {published data only}

Anon. Clinical evaluation of GSK576428 (fondaparinux sodium) in prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective total hip replacement surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: http://www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/AR3106333?study_ids=AR3106333#ps (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL

AR3106335 {published data only}

Anon. Clinical evaluation of GSK576428 (fondaparinux sodium) in prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip fracture surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [NCT00320424; URL: http://www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/AR3106335?study_ids=AR3106335#ps (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL

Argun 2013 {published data only}

Argun M, Oner M, Saglamoglu M, Karaman I, Guney A, Halici M, et al. Fondaparınux versus nadroparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective hip and knee arthroplasty. Current Therapeutic Research 2013;74:49–53. CENTRAL

Bonneux 2006 {published data only}

Bonneux IM, Bellemans J, Fabry G. Evaluation of wound healing after total knee arthroplasty in a randomized prospective trial comparing fondaparinux with enoxaparin. Knee 2006;13(2):118‐21. CENTRAL

Buller 2014 {published data only}

Buller HR, Halperin J, Hankey GJ, Pillion G, Prins MH, Raskob GE. Comparison of idrabiotaparinux with vitamin K antagonists for prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation: the Borealis‐Atrial Fibrillation Study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2014;12(6):824‐30. CENTRAL

Cassiopea {published data only}

Büller HR, Gallus AS, Pillion G, Prins MH, Raskob GE, on behalf of the Cassiopea Investigators. Enoxaparin followed by once‐weekly idrabiotaparinux versus enoxaparin plus warfarin for patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism: a randomised, double‐blind, double‐dummy, non‐inferiority trial. Lancet 2012;379(9811):123‐9. CENTRAL

Cohen 2007 {published data only}

Cohen A, Brenkel I, Skinner J, Warwick D. Graduated compression stockings do not add to the efficacy of fondaparinux for thromboprophylaxis in hip replacement surgery. A multi‐centre, multi‐national, randomised, open‐label study. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British Volume 2009;91‐B(Suppl 1):73‐c. CENTRAL
Cohen AT, Skinner JA, Warwick D, Brenkel I. The use of graduated compression stockings in association with fondaparinux in surgery of the hip. A multicentre, multinational, randomised, open‐label, parallel‐group comparative study. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British Volume 2007;89(7):887‐92. CENTRAL

EQUINOX {published data only}

The EQUINOX Invesstigators. Efficacy and safety of once weekly subcutaneous idrabiotaparinux in the treatment of patients with symptomatic deep venous thrombosis. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2011;9(1):92‐9. CENTRAL

extended van Gogh {published data only}

van Gogh Investigators, Buller HR, Cohen AT, Davidson B, Decousus H, Gallus AS, et al. Extended prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism with idraparinux. New England Journal of Medicine 2007;357(11):1105‐12. CENTRAL

FLEXTRA {published data only}

Anon. Flexibility in administration of Arixtra for prevention of symptomatic venous thromboembolism in orthopedic surgery. GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: http://www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/L8518?study_ids=L851#rs (accessed 22 July 2014)]CENTRAL
Colwell CW, Kwong LM, Turpie AGG, Davidson BL. Flexibility in administration of fondaparinux for prevention of symptomatic venous thromboembolism in orthopaedic surgery. Journal of Arthroplasty 2006;21(1):36‐45. CENTRAL
Davidson BL, Turpie AGG, Kwong LM, Colwell CW. FLEXTRA: early vs delayed initiation of postoperative fondaparinux prophylaxis after joint replacement: a clinical outcome study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2005;3(Suppl 1):Abstract OR061. CENTRAL

Kawaji 2012 {published data only}

Kawaji H, Ishii M, Tamaki Y, Hamasaki M, Ishikawa H, Sasaki K, et al. Postoperative prophylactic effect of fondaparinux for prevention of deep venous thrombosis after cemented total hip replacement:a comparative study. Modern Rheumatology / The Japan Rheumatism Association 2012;22(2):216–22. CENTRAL

Li 2013 {published data only}

Li MW, Zhao XM, Rao LX. The clinical efficacy and safety of fondaparinux combined with tirofiban hydrochloride in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention. Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi 2013;52:1037‐40. CENTRAL

MATISSE‐DVT {published data only}

Buller HR, Davidson BL, Decousus H, Gallus A, Gent M, Piovella F, et al. Fondaparinux or enoxaparin for the initial treatment of symptomatic deep venous thrombosis: a randomized trial. Annals of Internal Medicine 2004;140(11):867‐73. CENTRAL

MATISSE‐PE {published data only}

The Matisse Investigators. Subcutaneous fondaparinux versus intravenous unfractionated heparin in the initial treatment of pulmonary embolism. New England Journal of Medicine 2003;349(18):1695‐702. CENTRAL

NCT00521885 {published data only}

NCT00521885. Comparison of arixtra vs. lovenox to prevent blood clots in medically ill patients (BRiEF). ClinicalTrials.gov2007. [URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00521885 (accessed 8 March 2016)]CENTRAL

NCT00539942 {published data only}

NCT00539942. Study of arixtra to prevent blood clots in women undergoing abdominopelvic surgery for likely gynecologic malignancy. ClinicalTrials.gov. [URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00539942 (accessed 8 March 2016)]CENTRAL

PENTATAK {published data only}

Anon. A multicenter, concurrent control, randomized, open‐label, assessor‐blind, dose‐ranging study (of Org 31540/SR90107A) in the prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis in subjects undergoing total knee replacement surgery (PENTATAK). GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register2008. [URL: www.gsk‐clinicalstudyregister.com/study/95001 (accessed 23 July 2014)]CENTRAL

PERSIST {published data only}

PERSIST Investigators. A novel long‐acting synthetic factor Xa inhibitor (SanOrg34006) to replace warfarin for secondary prevention in deep vein thrombosis. A phase II evaluation. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2004;2(1):47‐53. CENTRAL

Rembrandt {published data only}

The Rembrandt Investigators. Treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis with a novel synthetic compound (SR90107A/ Org31540) with pure anti‐factor Xa activity. A phase II evaluation. Circulation 2000;102:2726‐31. CENTRAL

SAFE‐AF {published data only}

Cohen A, Stellbrink C, Le Heuzey JY, Faber T, Aliot E, Banik N, et al. Safety of fondaparinux in transoesophageal echocardiography‐guided electric cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (SAFE‐AF) study: a pilot study. Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases 2014;108:122‐31. CENTRAL

Sasaki 2009 {published data only}

Sasaki S, Miyakoshi N, Matsuura H, Saitoh H, Kudoh D, Shimada Y. Prospective randomized controlled trial on the effect of fondaparinux sodium for prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip fracture surgery. Journal of Orthopaedic Science 2009;14(5):491‐6. CENTRAL

Sasaki 2011 {published data only}

Sasaki S, Miyakoshi N, Matsuura H, Saito H, Nakanishi T, Kudo Y, et al. Prospective study on the efficacies of fondaparinux and enoxaparin in preventing venous thromboembolism after hip fracture surgery. Journal of Orthopaedic Science 2011;16(1):64‐70. CENTRAL

Savi 2005 {published data only}

Savi P, Chong BH, Greinacher A, Gruel Y, Kelton JG, Warkentin TE, et al. Effect of fondaparinux on platelet activation in the presence of heparin‐dependent antibodies: a blinded comparative multicenter study with unfractionated heparin. Blood 2005;105(1):139‐44. CENTRAL

Tsutsumi 2012 {published data only}

Tsutsumi S, Yajima R, Tabe Y, Takaaki T, Fujii F, Morita H, et al. The efficacy of fondaparinux for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism after resection for colorectal cancer. Hepatogastroenterology 2012;59:2477‐9. CENTRAL

van Gogh‐DVT {published data only}

van Gogh Investigators, Buller HR, Cohen AT, Davidson B, Decousus H, Gallus AS, et al. Idraparinux versus standard therapy for venous thromboembolic disease. New England Journal of Medicine 2007;357(11):1094‐104. CENTRAL

van Gogh‐PE {published data only}

van Gogh Investigators. Idraparinux versus standard therapy for venous thromboembolic disease. New England Journal of Medicine 2007;357(11):1094‐104. CENTRAL

Xin 2013 {published data only}

Xin Z, Ya‐Ling H, Xiao‐Zeng W, Bai‐Ge X. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux during thrombolytic therapy in acute ST elevation myocardial infarction patients. Heart 2013;99:A54‐A55. CENTRAL

Yamaoka 2014 {published data only}

Yamaoka YI, Nishikawa T. The impact of fondaparinux on the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism: the efficacy, safety and prognosis after resection for colorectal cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2014; Vol. 21, issue 1 Suppl 1. CENTRAL

Zhao 2013 {published data only}

Zhao X, Han Y, Wang X, Xu B. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux during thrombolytic therapy in acute ST elevation myocardial infarction patients. Cardiology (Switzerland) 2013;126:138. CENTRAL

Zhao 2015 {published data only}

Zhao XM, Gao CY, Chu YJ. Fondaparinux vs. enoxaparin in patients with non‐ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE‐ACS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and tirofiban: an exploratory study in China. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 2015;40:584‐9. CENTRAL

EUCTR2007‐003746‐15‐DE {published data only}

EUCTR2007‐003746‐15‐DE. Prospective randomized open study on the comparison of fondaparinux with the low‐molecular‐weight heparin enoxaparin in patients undergoing femoro‐distal venous bypass operation. WHO International Clinical Trials Registry2008. [URL: http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial.aspx?TrialID=EUCTR2007‐003746‐15‐DE (accessed 19 September 2016)]CENTRAL

EUCTR2008‐001779‐31‐IT {published data only}

Markers of hypercoagulability and risk of death and rehospitalization in heart failure patients: a pilot study on the effects of Fondaparinux ‐ Fondaparinux and heart failure. WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. [URL : http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=EUCTR2008‐001779‐31‐IT (accessed 19 September 2016)]CENTRAL

JPRN‐UMIN000002444 {published data only}

JPRN‐UMIN000002444. Randomized study of anti‐coagulant therapy to prevent postoperative deep venous thrombosis/pulmonary embolism. WHO International Clinical Trials Registry2009. [URL: http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/trial.aspx?trialid=JPRN‐UMIN000002444 (accessed 19 September 2016)]CENTRAL

JPRN‐UMIN000007005 {published data only}

JPRN‐UMIN000007005. The efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy Arixtra Injection for the prevention of the vein thromboembolism in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. WHO International Clinical Trials Registry2011. [URL: http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial.aspx?TrialID=JPRN‐UMIN000007005 (accessed 19 September 2016)]CENTRAL

JPRN‐UMIN000008435 {published data only}

Phase III study of efficacy of fondaparinux on the prevention of post‐operative venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing with laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. [URL: http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=JPRN‐UMIN000008435 (accessed 19 September 2016)]CENTRAL

PROTECT {published data only}

NCT00881088. Prophylaxis of thromboembolic complications trial: thromboprophylaxis needed in below knee plaster cast immobilization for ankle and foot fractures (PROTECT). ClinicalTrials.gov2009. [URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00881088?term=NCT00881088&rank=1 (accessed 8 March 2016)]CENTRAL

Ageno 2012

Ageno W, Riva N, Noris P, Di Nisio M, La Regina M, Arioli D, et al. The FONDAIR Study Group. Safety and efficacy of low dose fondaparinux (1.5 mg) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients with renal impairment: the FONDAIR study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2012;10(11):2291‐7.

Agnelli 2000

Agnelli G, Sonaglia F. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. Thrombosis Research 2000;97(1):V49‐62.

Amiral 1997

Amiral J, Lormeau JC, Marfaing‐Koka A, Vissac AM, Wolf M, Boyer‐Neumann C, et al. Absence of cross‐reactivity of SR90107A/ORG31540 pentasaccharide with antibodies to heparin‐PF4 complexes developed in heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia. Blood Coagulation and Fibrinolysis 1997;8(2):114‐7.

Atkins 2004

Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck‐Ytter Y, Flottorp S, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. British Medical Journal 2004;328(7454):1490‐4.

Bauer 2003

Bauer KA. New pentasaccharides for prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis: pharmacology. Chest 2003;124(6 Suppl):364s‐70s.

Bauersachs 2005

Bauersachs RM. Fondaparinux: an update on new study results. European Journal of Clinical Investigation 2005;35(Suppl 1):27‐32.

Bergqvist 2006

Bergqvist D. Review of fondaparinux sodium injection for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing surgery. Vascular Health and Risk Management 2006;2(4):365‐70.

Bounameaux 2002

Bounameaux H, Perneger T. Fondaparinux: a new synthetic pentasaccharide for thrombosis prevention. Lancet 2002;359(9319):1710‐1.

Brito 2011

Brito V, Ciapponi A, Kwong J. Factor Xa inhibitors for acute coronary syndromes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007038.pub2]

Delavenne 2010

Delavenne X, Zufferey P, Baylot D, Nguyen P, Borg JY, Fontenay M, et al. Population pharmacokinetics of fondaparinux administered at prophylactic doses after major orthopaedic surgery in everyday practice. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2010;104(2):252‐60.

Delavenne 2012

Delavenne X, Zufferey P, Nguyen P, Rosencher N, Samama CM, Bazzoli C, et al. Pharmacokinetics of fondaparinux 1.5 mg once daily in a real‐world cohort of patients with renal impairment undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2012;68(10):1403‐10.

Erkens 2010

Erkens PM, Prins MH. Fixed dose subcutaneous low molecular weight heparins versus adjusted dose unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001100.pub3]

Falck‐Ytter 2012

Falck‐Ytter Y, Francis CW, Johanson NA, Curley C, Dahl OE, Schulman S, et al. Prevention of VTE in orthopedic surgery patients: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence‐Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012;141(2 Suppl):e278S‐325S.

Fowkes 2003

Fowkes FJ, Price JF, Fowkes FG. Incidence of diagnosed deep vein thrombosis in the general population: systematic review. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery 2003;25(1):1‐5.

Geerts 2001

Geerts WH, Heit JA, Clagett GP, Pineo GF, Colwell CW, Anderson FA, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. Chest 2001;119(1 Suppl):132S‐75S.

Geerts 2004

Geerts WH, Pineo GF, Heit JA, Bergqvist D, Lassen MR, Colwell CW, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest 2004;126(3 Suppl):338S‐400S.

Geerts 2008

Geerts WH, Bergqvist D, Pineo GF, Heit JA, Samama CM, Lassen MR, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence‐Based Clinical Practive Guidelines (8th Edition). Chest 2008;133(6 Suppl):381S–453S.

GradePro [Computer program]

Brozek J, Oxman A, Schünemann H. [Computer program on www.gradepro.org]. GRADEpro. Version December 2014. McMaster University, 2014.

Hansson 2000

Hansson PO, Sorbo J, Eriksson H. Recurrent venous thromboembolism after deep vein thrombosis: incidence and risk factors. Archives of Internal Medicine 2000;160(6):769‐74.

Heit 2001

Heit JA, Melton LJ, Lohse CM, Petterson TM, Silverstein MD, Mohr DN, et al. Incidence of venous thromboembolism in hospitalised patients vs community residents. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2001;76(11):1102‐10.

Heit 2005

Heit JA, Cohen AT, Anderson FA. Estimated annual number of incident and recurrent, non‐fatal and fatal venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in the US. Blood 2005;106(11):Abstract 910.

Higgins 2011

Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC (editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011], The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Higgins 2011a

Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Hills 2009

Hills RK, Gray R, Wheatley K. Balancing treatment allocations by clinician or center in randomized trials allows unacceptable levels of treatment prediction. Journal of Evidence‐based Medicine 2009;2:196–204.

Koopman 2003

Koopman MM, Buller HR. Short‐ and long‐acting synthetic pentasaccharides. Journal of Internal Medicine 2003;254(4):335‐42.

Metzger 2015

Metzger A, Nagaraj T. New oral anticoagulants: clinical parameters and uses in practice. Consultant Pharmacist 2015;30(6):329‐45. [DOI: 10.4140/TCP.n.2015.329]

Mismetti 2012

Mismetti P, Samama CM, Rosencher N, Vielpeau C, Nguyen P, Deygas B, et al. Venous thromboembolism prevention with fondaparinux 1.5 mg in renally impaired patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. A real‐world, prospective, multicentre, cohort study. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2012;107(6):1151‐60.

Nijkeuter 2004

Nijkeuter M, Huisman MV. Pentasaccharides in the prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review. Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine 2004;10:338‐44.

Olson 1992

Olson ST, Bjork I, Sheffer R, Craig PA, Shore JD, Choay J. Role of the antithrombin‐binding pentasaccharide in heparin acceleration of antithrombin‐proteinase reactions. Resolution of the antithrombin conformational change contribution to heparin rate enhancement. Journal of Biological Chemistry 1992;267(18):12528‐38.

Palareti 2012

Palareti G, Schellong S. Isolated distal deep vein thrombosis: what we know and what we are doing. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2012;10(1):11‐9.

Paty 2007

Paty I, Trellu M, Paquet N, Sibille M, Perez Y, Ortiz J. Neutralization by avidin of anticoagulant activity of biotinylated idraparinux, the first and unique reversible long‐acting anticoagulant. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2007; Vol. 5 (Suppl 2):O‐T‐050.

Paty 2010

Paty I, Trellu M, Destors JM, Cortez P, Boelle E, Sanderink G. Reversibility of the anti‐FXa activity of idrabiotaparinux (biotinylated idraparinux) by intravenous avidin infusion. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2010;8(4):722‐9.

Pinede 2001

Pinede L, Ninet J, Duhaut P, Chabaud S, Demolombe‐Rague S, Durieu I, et al. Comparison of 3 and 6 months of oral anticoagulant therapy after a first episode of proximal deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism and comparison of 6 and 12 weeks of therapy after isolated calf deep vein thrombosis. Circulation 2001;103(20):2453‐60.

Prandoni 2008

Prandoni P,  Tormene D,  Perlati M,  Brandolin B,  Spiezia L. Idraparinux: review of its clinical efficacy and safety for prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders. Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs 2008;17(5):773‐7.

Salazar 2010

Salazar CA, Malaga G, Malasquez G. Direct thrombin inhibitors versus vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins for prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee replacement. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005981.pub2]

Savi 2008

Savi P, Herault JP, Duchaussoy P, Millet L, Schaeffer P, Petitou M, et al. Reversible biotinylated oligosaccharides: a new approach for a better management of anticoagulant therapy. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2008;6(10):1697‐706.

Shoda 2015

Shoda N, Yasunaga H, Horiguchi H, Fushimi K, Matsuda S, Kadono Y, et al. Prophylactic effect of fondaparinux and enoxaparin for preventing pulmonary embolism after total hip or knee arthroplasty: a retrospective observational study using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Modern Rheumatology / The Japan Rheumatism Association 2015;25(4):625‐9. [DOI: 10.3109/14397595.2014.997424]

Southworth 2013

Southworth MR, Reichman ME, Unger EF. Dabigatran and post marketing reports of bleeding. New England Journal of Medicine 2013;368:1272‐4.

Stoldt 1997

Stoldt HS, Aftab F, Chinol M, Paganelli G, Luca F, Testori A, et al. Pretargeting strategies for radio‐immuno guided tumour localisation and therapy. European Journal of Cancer 1997;33(2):186‐92.

Turpie 2003

Turpie AG, Eriksson BI, Bauer KA, Lassen MR. New pentasaccharides for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism: clinical studies. Chest 2003;124(6 Suppl):371S‐8S.

Turpie 2003a

Turpie AG. Future therapeutic directions for factor Xa inhibition in the prophylaxis and treatment of thrombotic disorders. American Journal of Health‐System Pharmacy 2003;60(22 Suppl 7):S20‐4.

Uchino 2012

Uchino K, Hernandez AV. Dabigatran association with higher risk of acute coronary events: meta‐analysis of non inferiority randomized controlled trials. Archives of Internal Medicine 2012;172:397–402.

Veyrat‐Follet 2009

Veyrat‐Follet C, Vivier N, Trellu M, Dubruc C, Sanderink GJ. The pharmacokinetics of idraparinux, a long‐acting indirect factor Xa inhibitor: population pharmacokinetic analysis from Phase III clinical trials. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2009;7(4):559‐65.

Yusuf 1985

Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, Collins R, Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomised trials. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 1985;27(5):335‐71.

References to other published versions of this review

Nichol 2005

Nichol IIE, Stansby GP, Kesteven P. Pentasaccharides for the prevention of venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005134]

Song 2011

Song Y, Liu L, Li X, Ding J. Pentasaccharides for the prevention of venous thromboembolism. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005134.pub2]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

ACT2545

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, open‐label, dose‐finding study

Participants

Total number of participants: 243

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) 4 mg group: 86, FX 2 mg group: 78, enoxaparin (EN) 40 mg group: 79

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX 4 mg group: 4 (1 adverse event, 1 lack of efficacy, 2 other reasons), FX 2 mg group: 3 (1 adverse event, 0 lack of efficacy, 2 other reasons), EN 40 mg group: 3 (1 adverse event, 1 lack of efficacy, 1 other reasons)

Inclusion: Men and postmenopausal women aged > 40 years with body weight 50 to 100 kg inclusive who were undergoing first single non‐revision total hip replacement (subsequently amended to non‐revision total hip replacement), with no contraindication to undergo phlebography on day 8 ± 1

Exclusion: Patients were excluded from study participation on the basis of their bleeding risk at the time of randomisation (e.g. known bleeding tendency, thrombocytes < 150 × 109/L, prothrombin time < 65%, APTT/control > 1.2 or other medical conditions associated with a bleeding risk), other significant conditions (e.g. history of PE or DVT, serum creatinine > 2.3 mg% (200 µmol/L), severe hepatic disease or uncontrolled severe high blood pressure (systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure > 200/120 mmHg) or use of anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy within 1 week before randomisation.

Interventions

FX: Phase I: 4 mg FX once daily. Phase II: 2 mg FX once daily; FX was administered for 7 days from day 2 (first injection planned 6 hours after surgery) to day 8.

EN: Phase I: 40 mg EN once daily (first control group (CG). Phase II: 40 mg EN once daily (second CG). EN was administered for 8 days, from day 1 to day 8 (first injection planned 12 hours before surgery and first postoperative injection planned 6 hours after surgery).

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: incidence of any DVT; DVT was assessed on day 8 ± 1 by phlebography

Primary safety outcome: major bleeding; major bleeding was defined as a clinically overt haemorrhage (except drain < 500 mL/d) in addition to 1 of the following criteria: haemoglobin (Hb) reduction to < 8 g/dL or Hb decrease > 2 g/dL over any 48‐hour period between day 3 and day 9 inclusive, or reoperation or intracranial bleeding or retroperitoneal or withdrawal

Notes

Use of adjunctive prophylaxis methods: No adjunctive method was used in this study.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, open‐label, dose finding study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, open‐label, dose finding study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mention that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Without clear description

Comment: unclear

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "A central evaluation was performed blindly by two independent experts"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

95.3%, 96.2%, 96.2% of participants in the 3 study groups finished treatment.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

APOLLO

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, parallel‐group trial

Participants

Total number of participants: 1309

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 650, placebo group: 659

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 57 (23 adverse events, 1 lack of efficacy, 33 other reasons), placebo group: 58 (17 adverse events, 2 lack of efficacy, 39 other reasons)

Inclusion: Patients were eligible if they were undergoing abdominal surgery (defined as surgery between the diaphragm and the pelvic floor), lasting longer than 45 minutes (from anaesthesia induction to incision closure); over 40 years old
Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the labelling of LMWH in force at the time study was conducted (e.g. active clinically significant bleeding, presence or history of low platelet count (< 100 x 109/L), medical condition associated with a bleeding risk), criteria related to contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 μmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or criteria related to trial methods (e.g. current or recent DVT, contraindication to heparin or oral anticoagulant, use of anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy during screening period).

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg FX sodium given sc starting 6 to 8 hours postoperatively, then once daily for 7 ± 2 days (day 1 was the day of surgery) or until the mandatory venography was obtained, whichever came first. Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 5 and day 10, but not more than 1 calendar day after the last study treatment administration. All participants were to receive IPC therapy concomitantly.

Placebo: Placebo was given sc starting 6 to 8 hours postoperatively, then once daily for 7 ± 2 days (day 1 was the day of surgery) or until mandatory venography was performed, whichever came first. Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 5 and day 10, but not more than 1 calendar day after the last study treatment administration. All participants were to receive IPC therapy concomitantly.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of 1 or more of the following VTE outcomes, evaluated (by an independent adjudicating committee) up to the first venography or up to day 10, whichever came first: venogram positive for DVT between day 5 and day 10, symptomatic DVT and/or non‐fatal PE, fatal PE

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding (any investigator‐reported unusual bleeding) recorded during treatment period (between first injection of study drug and 2 calendar days after last injection) and adjudicated as a major bleeding event by the Central Adjudication Committee (CAC). Major bleeding was defined as: fatal bleeding, surgical bleeding leading to intervention; non‐surgical site bleeding: retroperitoneal or intracranial bleeding, or bleeding into a critical organ (eye, adrenal gland, pericardium, spine) or leading to intervention, and/or a bleeding index ≥ 2.

Notes

Use of adjunctive prophylaxis methods: Both groups received background mechanical prophylaxis with IPC.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicenter, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicenter, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Multicenter, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study……2.5 mg FX sodium (or FX placebo) given subcutaneously (s.c.)"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "evaluated (by an independent adjudicating committee)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Less than 10% (9% and 8.9% of the 2 study groups) of participants withdrawn

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

AR3106116

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, open‐label study

Participants

Total number of participants: 127

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 83, intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) group: 44

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 7 (2 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 5 other reasons), IPC group: 1 (0 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 1 other reasons)

Inclusion: patients aged 40 years undergoing the following abdominal (area between diaphragm and pelvic floor) surgery under general anaesthesia lasting longer than 45 minutes: general or urological surgery, cancer surgery, gynaecological surgery, radical surgery for pelvic malignancy

Exlcusion: Patients were excluded if any of the exclusion criteria based on contraindications and precautions for use of anticoagulants currently approved in Japan (e.g. active, clinically significant bleeding, bleeding tendency) or exclusion criteria related to venography (e.g. severe renal disorder, hypersensitivity to contrast media) were applied, or if any of the prohibited medications were used within 1 week before first study drug administration, or use of IPC was contraindicated or inappropriate.

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg FX was administered once daily by sc injection for 4 to 8 days. First injection of study drug was given 24 ± 2 hours after surgical closure. Second and subsequent injections of study drug were given at approximately the same time every day as far as possible (but longer than 12 hours after the first dose). IPC was prohibited during surgical and treatment periods.

IPC: IPC was initiated before or after surgery and was continued until an appropriate time point. Procedures and methods usually employed at each individual study centre were followed as a rule.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: rate of VTE (symptomatic PE and any DVT) during main efficacy period

Primary safety outcomes: major bleeding

Major bleeding defined as:

  • Clinically unusual bleeding meeting any of the following criteria:

    • Fatal bleeding

    • Bleeding including retroperitoneal and intracranial bleeding, or bleeding into a critical organ (eye, adrenal gland, pericardium, spine)

    • Reoperation due to bleeding/haematoma at the operative site

    • Bleeding leading to Hb fall of 2 g/dL (1.6 mmol/L) within 48 hours of the bleed

    • Bleeding that required a transfusion of red blood cells or whole blood derived from 900 mL of whole blood within 48 hours of the bleed (excluding the autologous transfusion except for treatment of a bleeding adverse event (AE)

    • Bleeding leading to the bleeding index (BI)

BI calculated as "number of units* transfused" within 48 hours of the bleed + prebleed Hb (g/dL) – postbleed Hb within 48 hours of the bleed (g/dL)

* 450 mL of whole blood or red blood cells derived from 450 mL of whole blood is considered as 1 unit.

Notes

Use of adjunctive prophylaxis methods: No adjunctive prophylaxis method was used in this study.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "A multicenter, randomised, open‐label study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "A multicenter, randomised, open‐label study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mention that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Without clear description

Comment: unclear

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Rate of VTE (symptomatic PE and any DVT) during main efficacy period, adjudicated by Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Efficacy (CIACE)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

85.5% and 93.2% of randomised participants in the 2 study groups respectively finished their treatment.

Comment: low risk of bias; most participants finished the study

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

ARTEMIS

Methods

Multi‐centre, multi‐national, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study

Participants

Total number of participants: 849

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux group: 429; placebo group: 420

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow up: fondaparinux group: 4; placebo group: 6

Inclusion: Participants were acutely ill medical patients, aged ≥ 60 years and expected to require bed rest for at least 4 days at the moment of inclusion; hospitalised for congestive heart failure New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV, and/or acute respiratory illness in the presence of chronic lung disease, and/or acute infectious or inflammatory disease

Exclusion: Patients were excluded from study participation on the basis of their bleeding risk at the time of randomisation (e.g. active clinically significant bleeding or medical conditions associated with a bleeding risk) criteria related to contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 µmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or use of anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy within 48 hours before randomisation.

Interventions

Fondaparinux (FX): Administration of 2.5 mg FX (2.5 mg once daily as sc injection) started 2 hours after randomisation. Study treatment was to be given at least up to and including day 6 but not after day 14. Venography had to be performed within 1 day after cessation of treatment on days 6 to 15, or earlier in case of symptomatic VTE.

Placebo: Placebo was started 2 hours after randomisation. Study treatment was to be given at least up to and including day 6 but not after day 14. Venography had to be performed within 1 day after cessation of treatment on days 6 to 15, or earlier in case of symptomatic VTE.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: composite of the following VTE events recorded up to day 15 or up to the first venography, whichever came first: venogram positive for DVT, symptomatic DVT, non‐fatal PE or fatal PE. Venography and all other available diagnostic tests (ultrasonography, ventilation/perfusion lung scan, pulmonary angiography or spiral computed tomography scan, autopsy report, etc) were blindly adjudicated by experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC).

Primary safety outcome: major bleeding during treatment and 2 days thereafter, defined as fatal bleeding, bleeding in a critical location, bleeding leading to surgical intervention or overt bleeding associated with a drop in haemoglobin (Hb) concentration ≥ 20 g/L or leading to transfusion of 2 or more units of red blood cells

Efficacy and safety outcomes were adjudicated by a central independent committee (CIAC), whose members were unaware of the treatment assignment. Accumulated safety data were regularly reviewed by an independent committee.

Notes

Use of adjunctive prophylaxis methods: Use of aspirin or non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs
was discouraged. Graduated compression stockings and physiotherapy were allowed.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Randomisation was carried out using a predefined central randomisation list, balanced in blocks of four"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Multi‐centre, multi‐national, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Study drugs were provided in identical boxes"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "All venograms ……were blindly adjudicated by experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

89.4% and 88.7% of randomised participants in the 2 study groups, respectively, finished their treatment

Comment: low risk of bias; most participants finished the study

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

Bern 2015

Methods

Prospective, randomised, 3‐arm study

Participants

Total number of participants: 355

Number of participants allocated to each group: variable‐dose warfarin group: 118, fondaparinux group: 118, 1 mg daily warfarin group: 119

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: 2 in variable‐dose warfarin group did not receive allocated intervention, 1 was not analysed; 10 in fondaparinux group did not receive allocated intervention, 6 were not analysed; 7 in 1 mg daily warfarin group did not receive allocated intervention, 6 were not analysed

Inclusion criteria: Participants were recruited from among patients over 20 years of age planning elective primary unilateral total hip or knee replacement surgery at an orthopaedic specialty hospital.

Exclusion criteria

  • Abnormal platelet count, prothrombin time (PT) or partial thromboplastin time (PTT)

  • Surgery for acute fracture (< 4 weeks), septic joint or extraction arthroplasty

  • History of VTE or documented hypercoagulation syndrome

  • Increased risk of haemorrhage, as from active gastric ulcer or urinary tract bleed within the past year

  • Haemorrhagic stroke; brain, spinal or ophthalmologic surgery in previous 6 months

  • Liver enzymes or bilirubin greater than 2 x normal

  • Decreased renal function with GFR < 30 mL/min

  • Cancer in past year, other than localised cancers of the skin

  • Need for chronic anticoagulation

  • Need for long‐term platelet function suppressive therapy

  • Prior adverse reaction to any of the study drugs

  • Uncontrolled hypertension

  • BMI > 42

  • Pregnancy

Interventions

ARM A
Variable‐dose warfarin: 5.0 mg beginning the night before surgery, followed by 5.0 mg the night of surgery, then variable daily dose (target INR 2.0 to 2.5) until day 28 ± 2 of follow‐up
ARM B
Fondaparinux: 2.5 mg daily starting 6 or more hours after surgery, but no later than 6 AM the next day, or 6 to 8 hours after epidural catheter removal; continued until day 28 ± 2 of follow‐up
ARM C

Fixed low‐dose warfarin 1.0 mg daily, beginning 7 days preoperatively, and continued at 1.0 mg daily until day 28 ± 2 of follow‐up

Outcomes

Primary endpoint was composite DVT, PE or death due to VTE. Secondary endpoints included frequency of proximal vs distal DVT, estimated blood loss (EBL) at surgery and haemorrhagic complications.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: Patients had early postoperative ambulation. All patients wore pneumatic compression stockings while in‐patients. Elastic compression stockings were prescribed to be used after discharge until follow‐up ultrasonography. Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 6% was allowed intraoperatively for case‐specific reasons. Use of platelet function suppressive drugs, such as non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), was discouraged but was not prohibited by the protocol.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "A member of the pharmacy department pulled randomized cards as prepared by the statisticians"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "A member of the pharmacy department pulled randomized cards as prepared by the statisticians"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Not mentioned

Comment: probably not done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Radiology technicians and the radiologists were blinded to patient randomization"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

99.1%, 94.9% and 94.9% of participants in 3 groups completed the study.

Comment: probably done

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All endpoints listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Low risk

No risk of other bias identified

CALISTO

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, 2‐parallel‐group study

Participants

Total number of participants: 3002

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 1502, placebo group: 1500

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 21 (2 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 19 other reasons), placebo group: 33 (1 adverse event, 0 lack of efficacy, 32 other reasons)

Inclusion: Hospitalised and non‐hospitalised male and female patients 18 years of age or older with acute symptomatic isolated superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) of the lower limbs at least 5 cm long, documented by standard compression ultrasonography (CUS) were eligible to enter the study.

Exclusion: Patients at high risk of VTE were excluded (e.g. those with DVT on the qualifying ultrasound exam and/or documented PE at inclusion, with SVT within 3 cm from the sapheno‐femoral junction (SFJ) requiring ligation of the SFJ or thrombectomy, with active cancer, or with documented DVT or PE within the previous 6 months).

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg FX sc once daily (self‐administered or not self‐administered). Treatment was presented as prefilled (0.5 mL) syringes. Duration of treatment was 45 days with 30‐day follow‐up.

Placebo: matching placebo administered sc once daily (self‐administered or not self‐administered). Treatment was presented as prefilled (0.5 mL) syringes. Duration of treatment was 45 days with 30‐day follow‐up.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: incidence of VTE and/or death from any cause recorded up to day 47. VTE was defined as a composite of symptomatic DVT, symptomatic PE, symptomatic extension of SVT or symptomatic recurrence of SVT. All VTEs were confirmed by objective tests and were then adjudicated by an independent central adjudication committee (CAC), whose members were blinded to treatment assignment.

Primary safety outcome: major bleeding

Notes

Use of adjunctive methods: Participants were encouraged to use graduated compression stockings and were allowed to take acetaminophen or topical non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs as needed. Use of oral antiplatelet agents or aspirin at a low dose (≤ 325 mg per day) was discouraged. In total, 1131 participants in FX group used graduated stockings, and 347 participants used antiplatelet agents of all 1502 participants; 1147 participants in placebo group used graduated stockings, and 364 used antiplatelet agents of all 1500 participants, as adjunctive anticoagulative methods

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "With the use of a central telephone system and a computer‐generated randomisation list"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "With the use of a central telephone system and a computer‐generated randomisation list"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "to fondaparinux at a dose of 2.5 mg or matching placebo"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "adjudicated by an independent central adjudication committee (CAC)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

1481 (98.6%) and 1467 (97.8%) participants in the 2 study groups finished the study.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

Cho 2013

Methods

Double‐blind, prospective, randomised, controlled trial

Participants

Total number of participants: 148

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux group: 74, placebo group: 74

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 0, placebo group: 0

Inclusion: All adult patients with a diagnosis of primary osteoarthritis of the knee and undergoing elective unilateral primary TKA were considered for inclusion in the study.

Exclusion: patients undergoing bilateral knee replacements; patients with diagnosed chronic or acute DVT preoperatively; patients with active bleeding or documented congenital or acquired bleeding disorders such as haemophilia, current ulcerative or angiodysplastic gastrointestinal disease; hemorrhagic stroke or brain, spinal or ophthalmologic surgery within the previous 3 months. Additional exclusion criteria were contraindication to anticoagulant therapy, serum creatinine concentration > 2 mg/dL in a well‐hydrated patient and platelet count < 100,000 per cubic millimetre.

Interventions

FX: subcutaneous doses of 2.5 mg of fondaparinux (Arixtra; GlaxoSmith‐Kline, UK) once daily

Placebo: 0.25 mL of isotonic saline once daily

The first postoperative injection was administered 6 to 8 hours after surgery, and the second injection was given 24 hours after the first. The day of surgery was defined as day 1. Treatment was scheduled to continue with a daily single dose until day 5.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: prevalence of DVT ‐ total, proximal and distal ‐ and symptomatic PE up to day 7

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding. Major bleeding included clinically overt bleeding requiring transfusion of ≥ 2 units of blood products (considering 450 mL of reinfused shed blood as 1 U), bleeding with a serious or life‐threatening clinical event or requiring surgical intervention, bleeding in retroperitoneal, intracranial or intraocular locations or bleeding resulting in death.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: Graduated compression stockings were applied in all participants. All were managed by the same rehabilitation protocol, which included range of motion, quadriceps, hamstring and
calf pump exercises and straight leg raising on postoperative day 1, and bedside continuous passive mobilization on day 2. Participants were made to stand on day 1 and were allowed partial weight bearing on the operated leg from day 2.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quotes: "a double‐blind, prospective randomised controlled trial" and "Eligible patients were randomly assigned prior to the surgery through a computer‐derived randomisation table with block sizes of four to receive……"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "The randomisation schedule was known to the research pharmacist who prepared the study medication but was not involved in any way with the care of the patients. The patients, surgeon, health care providers, and outcome assessors were blinded to the randomisation till the end of the study"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "The patients, surgeon, health care providers, and outcome assessors were blinded to the randomisation till the end of the study"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "The radiologist was blinded to the treatment assignment"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

All participants in the 2 groups finished treatment, and primary efficacy and safety results were assessed.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All results planned in the study design section were assessed.

Other bias

Low risk

No risk of other bias was identified.

DRI4090

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group, dose‐response study

Participants

Total number of participants: 411

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) 0.75 mg group: 82, FX 1.5 mg group: 82, FX 2.5 mg group: 82, FX 3.0 mg group: 83, placebo group: 82

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX 0.75 mg group: 8 (6 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 2 other reasons), FX 1.5 mg group: 6 (5 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 1 other reasons), FX 2.5 mg group: 3 (3 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 0 other reasons), FX 3.0 mg group: 5 (5 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 0 other reasons), placebo group: 3 (2 adverse event, 0 lack of efficacy, 1 other reasons)

Inclusion: Patients undergoing primary elective THR surgery or revision of a THR; ≥ 20 years of age

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the Japanese labelling for anticoagulants in force at the time study was conducted (e.g. active, clinically significant bleeding; documented congenital or acquired bleeding tendency/disorders, other medical condition associated with a bleeding risk), or criteria related to use of contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 μmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or use of anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy within 1 week before first dose of study medication.

Interventions

FX: once daily sc dosing of FX 0.75, 1.5, 2.5 or 3.0 mg for at least 10 calendar days (maximum 14 days) from day 2 to day 11 or 15. The first dose of study drug was administered 24 ± 2 hours after surgical closure (day 1 was the day of surgery). Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 11 and day 17 but not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration

Placebo: once daily sc placebo for at least 10 calendar days (maximum 14 days) from day 2 to day 11 or 15. First dose of study drug was administered 24 ± 2 hours after surgical closure (day 1 was the day of surgery). Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 11 and day 17 but not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of the following VTE outcomes recorded up to day 17 or to first venography, whichever occurred first: adjudicated mandatory venogram positive for DVT between day 11 and day 17; adjudicated symptomatic DVT; adjudicated positive fatal or non‐fatal PE. All venography sessions, scheduled or unscheduled, and other available diagnostic tests (ultrasonography, ventilation/perfusion lung scan, pulmonary angiography or spiral computed tomography scan, autopsy report, etc.) were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Efficacy (CIACE).

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding (any investigator‐reported bleeding adjudicated as a major bleeding event by the Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Safety (CIACS)) recorded during \treatment period (i.e. from first injection of study drug to 2 days after last dose). Major bleeding was defined as fatal bleeding, or clinically overt bleeding including retroperitoneal or intracranial bleeding or bleeding into a critical organ (eye, adrenal gland, pericardium, spine); reoperation due to bleeding/hematoma at the operative site; clinically overt bleeding leading to Hb fall > 2 g/dL (1.6 mmol/L) within 48 hours of the bleed; clinically overt bleeding that required a transfusion of red blood cell or whole blood derived from > 900 mL of whole blood within 48 hours of the bleed (excluding autologous transfusion except for treatment of bleeding adverse event (AE)); clinically overt bleeding leading to bleeding index > 2 (within 48 hours of the bleed, calculated as "number of units transfused" + prebleed Hb (g/dL) – postbleed Hb (g/dL)

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: no mention of use of any adjunctive anticoagulative method

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, dose response study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, dose response study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Without clear description

Comment: unclear

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Efficacy (CIACE)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

56 of 71 randomised participants, 62 of 82 randomised participants, 63 of 82 randomised participants, 67 of 82 randomised participants, 68 of 83 randomised participants in the 5 study groups, respectively, finished their treatment and were involved in the efficacy analysis.

Comment: low risk of bias; most participants finished the study

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

DRI4757

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group, dose‐response study

Participants

Total number of participants: 432

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) 0.75 mg group: 86, FX 1.5 mg group: 87, FX 2.5 mg group: 86, FX 3.0 mg group: 86, placebo group: 87

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX 0.75 mg group: 4 (4 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 0 withdrawn consent, 0 other reasons), FX 1.5 mg group: 7 (3 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 4 withdrawn consents, 0 other reasons), FX 2.5 mg group: 6 (2 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 4 withdrawn consents, 0 other reasons), FX 3.0 mg group: 5 (4 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 0 withdrawn consent, 1 other reasons), placebo group: 7 (4 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 1 withdrawn consent, 2 other reasons)

Inclusion: patients who were undergoing elective primary TKR surgery or revision surgery of a TKR; ≥ 20 years of age

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the Japanese labelling for anticoagulants in force at the time study was conducted (e.g. active, clinically significant bleeding; documented congenital or acquired bleeding tendency/disorders or other medical conditions associated with a bleeding risk), criteria related to use of contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 μmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or use of anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy within 1 week before first dose of study medication.

Interventions

FX: once daily sc dosing of FX 0.75, 1.5, 2.5 or 3.0 mg for at least 10 calendar days (maximum 14 days) from day 2 to day 11 or 15. First dose of study drug was administered 24 ± 2 hours after surgical closure (day 1 was the day of surgery). Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 11 and day 17 but not later than 2 calendar days after the last study drug administration.

Placebo: once daily sc placebo for at least 10 calendar days (maximum 14 days) from day 2 to day 11 or 15. First dose of study drug was administered 24 ± 2 hours after surgical closure (day 1 was the day of surgery). Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 11 and day 17 but no later than 2 calendar days after last study drug administration.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of the following VTE outcomes recorded up to day 17 or to first venography, whichever occurred first: adjudicated mandatory venogram positive for DVT between day 11 and day 17; adjudicated symptomatic DVT; adjudicated positive fatal or non‐fatal PE. All venography procedures, scheduled or unscheduled, and other available diagnostic tests (ultrasonography, ventilation/perfusion lung scan, pulmonary angiography or spiral computed tomography scan, autopsy report, etc.) were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Efficacy (CIACE).

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding (any investigator‐reported bleeding adjudicated as a major bleeding event by the Central Independent Adjudication Committee of Safety (CIACS)). This was recorded during treatment period (i.e. from first injection of study drug to 2 days after the last dose). Major bleeding was defined as fatal bleeding, clinically overt bleeding including retroperitoneal or intracranial bleeding or bleeding into a critical organ (eye, adrenal gland, pericardium, spine); reoperation due to bleeding/haematoma at the operative site; clinically overt bleeding leading to Hb fall > 2 g/dL (1.6 mmol/L) within 48 hours of the bleed; clinically overt bleeding that required a transfusion of red blood cell or whole blood derived from > 900 mL of whole blood within 48 hours of the bleed (excluding autologous transfusion, except for treatment of bleeding adverse event (AE)); clinically overt bleeding leading to bleeding index > 2 (within 48 hours of the bleed, calculated as "number of units* transfused" + prebleed Hb (g/dL) – postbleed Hb (g/dL)). Other safety variables were minor bleeding (defined as clinically overt bleeding not meeting the criteria for major bleeding and considered more than expected in the clinical context), transfusion requirements, AEs/serious AEs (SAEs) and deaths.
*450 mL of whole blood or red blood cell derived from 450 mL of whole blood is considered as 1 unit.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: no mention of use of any adjunctive anticoagulative method

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, double‐blind, PBO controlled, parallel group, dose response study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, double‐blind, PBO controlled, parallel group, dose response study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Without clear description

Comment: unclear

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "A central, independent adjudication committee reviewed both safety and efficacy outcomes"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

74 of 85 randomised participants, 74 of 85 randomised participants, 74 of 85 randomised participants, 74 of 85 randomised participants and 74 of 85 randomised participants in the 5 study groups, respectively, finished treatment and were involved in the efficacy analysis.

Comment: low risk of bias; most participants finished the study

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

EFFORT

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, pilot trial

Participants

Total number of participants: 198

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux group: 100, enoxaparin group: 98

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: Of the 198 randomised participants, 7 in the fondaparinux group and 7 in the enoxaparin group did not receive treatment according to protocol, but all randomised participants were analysed.

Inclusion: Patients were eligible for the study if they were 18 years of age or older with a body mass index (BMI) of 35 to 59 kg/m2, and were undergoing laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) or laparoscopic Roux‐en Y gastric bypass (LRYGB)

Exclusion: Patients with BMI > 60 were excluded, as they may have required extended DVT prophylaxis. Patients with contraindications to low molecular weight heparin or selective antithrombin III agonists, previous history of DVT or PE, documented clotting/coagulation disorders, history of treatment for cancer within the past year, history of venous stasis or superficial thrombophlebitis, vein stripping or ligation, obesity hypoventilation syndrome or recent history of smoking (within the past year) were excluded. Patients with severe hepatic impairment, creatinine clearance < 30 mL per minute or platelet count < 100,000 per cubic millimetre were also excluded, as were women of childbearing age if they were pregnant or were taking oestrogen‐based birth control medication within 1 month of surgery

Interventions

FX: The fondaparinux group received a placebo on call to the operating room. Six hours after surgery stop time, participants were given 5 mg fondaparinux subcutaneously. Beginning on postoperative day 1, participants received 5 mg of fondaparinux subcutaneously once daily in the morning and placebo (saline) injections subcutaneously once daily in the evening for the duration of their hospital stay.

Enoxaparin: In accordance with current practice, the enoxaparin group received a dose of enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneously on call to the operating room. To maintain blinding, participants randomised to enoxaparin received placebo (saline) injection 6 hours after surgery stop time. Beginning on postoperative day 1, 40 mg of enoxaparin was administered subcutaneously twice daily for the duration of the participant's hospital stay.

Outcomes

Primary outcome was the effect of preoperative enoxaparin vs postoperative fondaparinux prophylaxis on antifactor Xa concentrations in participants undergoing bariatric surgery. Attainment of a target antifactor Xa level was determined on the basis of blood samples drawn 3 hours after the drug was received on postoperative day 1. This cutoff was the standard for adequate prophylaxis used by our in‐patient haematology lab (Z 0.20 IU/mL for enoxaparin and Z 0.39 mg/L for fondaparinux).

Secondary outcomes were asymptomatic DVT, defined as a positive MRV within 2 weeks after surgery, and symptomatic DVT. Safety outcomes included perioperative bleeding, perioperative complications and death.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: All participants had sequential compression devices and antiembolic stockings placed before induction of anaesthesia; 4 to 6 hours after surgery stop time, participants were ambulated in the hallways. Sequential compression devices were removed during ambulation. Use of aspirin, non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs and other antiplatelet agents was prohibited during participants' hospital stay.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "using a computer‐generated randomization scheme (Microsoft Excel 2007 data analysis tool pack)"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Allocation was performed by the pharmacy and was concealed from patients and study personnel"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "placebo doses were prepared to maintain the blind. Active and placebo syringes were prepared by our inpatient pharmacy and were not identifiable by external appearance"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "asymptomatic DVT, defined as a positive MRV within 2 weeks following surgery, and symptomatic DVT"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

83 of 98 in the enoxaparin group, 94 of 100 in the fondaparinux group had MRV results.

Comment: low risk of bias; most participants finished the study

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company provided study material and additional financial support but was not involved in the design and procedure of the study.

EPHESUS

Methods

Multi‐national, multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, double‐dummy, parallel‐group study

Participants

Total number of participants: 2309

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 1155, enoxaparin (EN) group: 1154

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 70 (18 adverse events, 7 lack of efficacy, 45 other reasons), EN group: 58 (15 adverse events, 5 lack of efficacy, 38 other reasons)

Inclusion: Patients were eligible if they were undergoing an elective, primary THR surgery or a revision of at least 1 component of a THR; ≥ 18 years of age; men and women of non‐childbearing potential or of childbearing potential and having a negative pregnancy test within 48 hours before surgery or first study drug administration, whichever came first; written informed consent

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the labelling of LMWH in force at the time of study conduct (e.g. active clinically significant bleeding, presence or history of low platelet count (< 100 x 109/L), medical condition associated with a bleeding risk), criteria related to contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 µmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or use of anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy within 2 days before first dose of study medication.

Interventions

FX: administration of FX (2.5 mg once daily sc injection) started postoperatively at 6 ± 2 hours after surgery closure

EN: administration of EN (40 mg once daily as sc injection) started preoperatively at 12 ± 2 hours before the start of surgery, then postoperatively at least 12 hours after the preoperative dose but not longer than 24 hours after surgery

Placebo: Respective placebo to each drug was administered to protect the double‐blind (double‐dummy method).

Study treatment was given up to day 7 ± 2 (day 1 was the day of surgery) or until mandatory venography was performed, whichever came first. Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 5 and day 11, but not more than 2 calendar days after last study treatment administration.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of the following VTE outcome results recorded up to day 11: adjudicated venogram positive for DVT or adjudicated symptomatic/asymptomatic DVT; adjudicated PE. All venography procedures, scheduled or unscheduled, and other available diagnostic tests (ultrasonography, ventilation/perfusion lung scan, pulmonary angiography or spiral computed tomography scan, autopsy report, etc) were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC).

Primary safety endpoint: incidence of major bleeding (any investigator‐reported unusual bleeding adjudicated as a major bleeding event by the CIAC) recorded between first injection of study drug (active drug or placebo) and day 11. Major bleeding was defined as fatal bleeding; clinically overt bleeding including retroperitoneal or intracranial bleeding, or bleeding into a critical organ (eye, spine, pericardium, adrenal gland); reoperation due to bleeding/haematoma at the operative site; clinically overt bleeding leading to a fall in Hb ≥ 2 g/dL (1.6 mmol/L) and/or transfusion of ≥ 2 units of packed red blood cells or whole blood AND for which the combined calculated index was ≥ 2. Other safety variables were minor bleeding (defined as clinically overt bleeding not meeting the criteria for major bleeding and considered more than expected in the clinical context), transfusion requirements, adverse events (AEs)/serious AEs (SAEs), deaths and changes in laboratory parameters recorded between first injection of study drug and day 11. In addition, all safety parameters were recorded between first injection and day 49.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: In FX group, 29 participants received prohibited treatment (intermittent pneumatic compression, dextran, thrombolytic treatment and any other anticoagulant agents), 483 received discouraged treatment (aspirin or non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs) and 649 wore graduated compression stockings; in EN group, 30 participants received prohibited treatment (intermittent pneumatic compression, dextran, thrombolytic treatment and any other anticoagulant agents), 493 received discouraged treatment (aspirin or non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs) and 654 wore graduated compression stockings.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multinational, multicenter, randomised, double‐blind, double‐dummy, parallel‐group study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly described use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multinational, multicenter, randomised, double‐blind, double‐dummy, parallel‐group study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Respective placebo to each drug was administered to protect the double‐blind (double‐dummy method)"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

93.9% and 94.9% of participants in the 2 study groups, respectively, finished treatment.

Comment: low risk of bias; most participants finished the study

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

FONDACAST

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, open‐label, controlled, 2‐parallel‐group, Phase III study

Participants

Total number of participants: 1243

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 621, nadroparin (NA) group: 622

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 14 (3 adverse events, 4 withdrawals by participant, 4 lost to follow‐up, 0 immobilisation, 1 investigator/orthopaedic surgeon decision, 2 orthopaedic surgery, 0 visits not performed, 0 deep vein thrombosis), NA group: 8 (0 due to adverse events, 0 due to lack of efficacy, 8 due to other reasons)

Inclusion: requiring rigid or semirigid immobilisation (e.g. with a plaster cast or brace) for at least 21 days and up to 45 days because of isolated non‐surgical below‐knee injury, with a no weight‐bearing recommendation at the time of inclusion (partial weight bearing is permitted, e.g. crutches, walking cast, relief shoes); presenting at least 1 of the following risk factors for venous thromboembolism: below‐knee fracture or Achilles tendon rupture, age ≥ 40 years, body mass index > 30 kg/m2, oestrogen‐containing hormonal replacement therapy or oral contraception, active cancer (treatment ongoing or stopped for less than 1 year), history of VTE, congenital or acquired hypercoagulable stat; requiring thromboprophylaxis according to the investigator's judgement up to complete mobilisation (corresponding to cast or brace removal; able and willing to provide written informed consent)

Exclusion: delay between injury and randomisation greater than 2 days; treatment with antithrombotic or anticoagulant therapy, including low‐dose anticoagulation, for longer than 2 days before randomisation; anticoagulant therapy required or likely to be required during the study period for another reason (e.g. planned surgery justifying pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, curative dose for treatment of VTE); shown hypersensitivity to fondaparinux or nadroparin or their excipient; known history of heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia; women of childbearing potential not using a reliable contraceptive method throughout the study period; women pregnant or breast‐feeding during the study period; active, clinically significant bleeding; clinically significant bleeding within past 6 months; major surgery within previous 3 months; intraocular (other than cataract), spinal and/or brain surgery within previous 12 months; haemorrhagic stroke within previous 12 months; severe head injury within previous 3 months; documented congenital or acquired bleeding tendency/disorder(s); previous (within 12 months) or active or currently treated peptic ulcer disease; uncontrolled arterial hypertension (systolic blood pressure over 180 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure over 110 mm Hg); treatment with more than 1 antiplatelet agent (e.g. clopidogrel and aspirin) at any dose; need for long‐term aspirin at doses ≥ 325 mg or long‐term NSAIDs; bacterial endocarditis; severe hepatic impairment; calculated creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min; thrombocytopenia (< 100 x 109/L); body weight < 50 kg; any condition that could prevent the patient from providing written informed consent or from adhering to study treatment; life expectancy < 6 months; participation in any study using an investigational drug during previous 3 months; patient in whom V3 is unlikely to be feasible (e.g. patient moving house);

In France, a patient was not be eligible for inclusion in this study if not affiliated with or a beneficiary of a social security system. This is an additional exclusion criterion that applies only to individuals enrolled in France.

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg in 0.5 mL or 1.5 mg in 0.3 mL for at least 21 days and up to 45 days

NA: 2850 anti‐Xa IU in 0.3 mL administered sc once daily. Treatments were presented as prefilled syringes for at least 21 days and up to 45 days

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: composite of VTE and death up to complete mobilisation, corresponding to cast or brace removal (plus 2 days). VTE was defined in this study as asymptomatic DVT detected by systematic compression ultrasonography, symptomatic DVT or symptomatic fatal or non‐fatal PE.

Primary safety outcome: major bleeding, non‐major clinically relevant bleeding and minor bleeding up to complete mobilisation (V3) plus 4 days, and up to the final visit or contact

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: No adjunctive anticoagulative method was used in this study.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "multicenter, randomised, open‐label, controlled, two‐parallel‐group, phase III study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "multicenter, randomised, open‐label, controlled, two‐parallel‐group, phase III study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Multi‐centre, randomised, open‐label, controlled, 2‐parallel‐group, phase III study

Comment: probably not done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "All events were blindly adjudicated by an independent committee"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

97.7% and 98.7% of participants in the 2 study groups, respectively, finished treatment.

Comment: low risk of bias; most participants finished the study

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

Fuji 2015

Methods

Randomised, open‐label, controlled study

Participants

Total number of participants: 43

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 21, edoxaban group: 22

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 3 participants discontinued, edoxaban group: 2 participants discontinued

Inclusion: patients ≥ 20 years of age, with serious renal injury (creatinine clearance ≥ 20 mL/min to < 30 mL/min) who were undergoing unilateral TKA or THA (excluding revision surgeries) or hip fracture surgery for medial or lateral femoral neck fracture (trochanteric or subtrochanteric section of the femur) within 10 days of presurgical examination. Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Exclusion: Presurgical exclusion criteria included, but were not limited to, patients undergoing or possibly undergoing haemodialysis; risk of bleeding; risk of thromboembolism; and hepatic dysfunction. Postsurgical exclusion criteria included, but were not limited to, creatinine clearance < 15 mL/min; abnormal bleeding at the site of spinal anaesthesia; abnormal or excessive bleeding during or immediately after surgery; and inability to take oral medication.

Interventions

Fondaparinux: subcutaneous fondaparinux 1.5 mg sc once daily

Edoxaban: oral edoxaban 15 mg once daily

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: incidence of symptomatic VTE (composite of symptomatic DVT or PE) during treatment period

Primary safety outcome: major bleeding defined as fatal bleeding; clinically overt bleeding accompanied by a decrease in haemoglobin > 2 g/dL or requiring a transfusion of > 4 units of blood (1 unit = ˜200 mL); retroperitoneal, intracranial, intraocular or intrathecal bleeding; or bleeding requiring repeat surgery

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: Concomitant physiotherapy (intermittent pneumatic compression devices or elastic stockings) was permitted throughout the treatment period.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Randomised, controlled study applied permuted block method with SAS software to generate random sequence.

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Randomised, controlled study applied permuted block method with SAS software to generate random sequence.

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Open‐label study

Comment: probably not done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

All thromboembolic events were assessed by a thromboembolic event assessor, who was blinded to treatment group, on the basis of imaging results.

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

18/21 and 20/22 participants in the fondaparinux and edoxaban groups, respectively finished their treatment.

Comment: probably done

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

This study was supported by a pharmaceutical company that was involved in the study design and analysis of the data and provided writing and editorial support.

Kolluri 2016

Methods

Randomised, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind study

Participants

Total number of participants: 78

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux group: 41, placebo group: 37

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: 2 participants in the fondaparinux group and no participants in the placebo group withdrew; all randomised participants were analysed.

Inclusion criteria: All patients scheduled to undergo a first or a repeat isolated CABG operation were considered for enrolment in the study.

Exclusion criteria

  • Long‐term anticoagulation with unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin, coumadin or heparinoids

  • Contraindications to anticoagulation

  • Creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min

  • Body weight < 50 kg

  • Presence of indwelling epidural catheter

  • Hepatic failure

  • Pregnant state

  • Life expectancy < 6 months

  • Platelet count < 100,000/mm3

  • Whole blood haemoglobin concentration < 9 g/dL

  • Venous thromboembolism documented within past 3 months

  • Acute bacterial endocarditis

  • Cerebral metastasis or abscess

  • History of heparin‐induced thrombocytopaenia

  • Presence of acute deep venous thrombosis on preoperative duplex ultrasonography of lower extremities

  • Inability to undergo venous duplex of lower extremities

  • Inability to consent

  • Refusal by treating physician

Interventions

Fondaparinux (FX): Intervention group received 2.5 mg subcutaneous injections of fondaparinux sodium daily, starting at a mean of 12 ± 2 hours after wound closure or on the morning of the first postoperative day. Second dose was administered at a mean of 24 ± 2 hours after the first dose, and subsequent injections were administered once daily for 9 days or until the patient was discharged from the hospital, whichever happened first.

Placebo: Control group received similar amounts of subcutaneous isotonic saline on the same schedule as the intervention group.

Outcomes

Primary study endpoint: composite, up to day 11, of cumulative incidence of all VTE events, defined as symptomatic and asymptomatic DVT, and fatal and non‐fatal pulmonary embolisms

Primary safety endpoint: cumulative incidence of major haemorrhages

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: Both groups routinely received graduated compression stockings and/or intermittent pneumatic compression (mechanical antithrombotic prophylaxis).

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "This study was conducted in compliance with the Good Clinical Practice guidelines"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "This study was conducted in compliance with the Good Clinical Practice guidelines"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "The control group received similar amounts of subcutaneous isotonic saline on the same schedule as the interventional group"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Quote: "Patients who developed symptomatic DVT or VTE underwent DUS scan of the lower extremities. An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board monitored the safety of the study."

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Two patients in the fondaparinux group, who withdrew their consent at 3 and 8 days
post enrollment, respectively, did not undergo DUS and were removed from the study. Clinical follow‐ups were complete in 76 patients (97.4%)"

Comment: probably done

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Low risk

No other bias noted

L‐8541

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, single‐blind, parallel‐group control study

Participants

Total number of participants: 237

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 119, enoxaparin (EN) group: 118

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 6 (5 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 1 other reasons), EN group: 3 (2 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 1 other reasons)

Inclusion: Male/female patients (aged 18 to 75 years) who were to undergo an elective hip or knee replacement or revision, and who gave written informed consent, were included in the study.
Exclusion: Exclusion criteria included the following: history of serious active bleeding in past 3 months; concurrent or history of thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 100 x 109/L); concurrent haemorrhagic cerebrovascular disease or surgical history in brain, spine or eye; abnormality in hepatic (> 1.5 x ULN), renal (CrCl < 30 mL/min) or cardiac function, uncontrolled hypertension or tumour; and concurrent need for hip and knee replacement or double hip or knee replacement.

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg for 7 ± 2 days (once daily sc injection)

EN: 40 mg for 7 ± 2 days

First treatment injection (placebo or enoxaparin) was administered at 12 ± 2 hours before surgery, then was continued for 7 ± 2 days post surgery, via daily sc injection.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: overall DVT events as confirmed by colour ultrasound imaging conducted within 2 days after the last dose following orthopaedic surgery

Primary safety outcome: major bleeding recorded between day 1 and day 9 post surgery

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: no mention of use of any adjunctive anticoagulative method

Used for sensitivity analysis

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multi‐centre, randomised, single‐blind, parallel control study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multi‐centre, randomised, single‐ blind, parallel control study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Quote: "Multi‐centre, randomised, single‐blind, parallel control study"

Comment: probably not done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Not clearly described

Comment: unclear

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

94.96% and 97.46% of participants in both groups completed the study.

Comment: probably done

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

L‐8635

Methods

Randomised, open label, evaluator‐blinded

Participants

Total number of participants: 51

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 28, enoxaparin (EN) group: 23

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 4 (0 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 4 other reasons), EN group: 1 (1 adverse event, 0 lack of efficacy, 0 other reasons)

Inclusion: Patients ≥ 20 years of age scheduled for primary elective total knee replacement surgery were included in the study.

Exclusion: Patients were excluded if they had leg oedema, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes with peripheral neuropathy or any condition likely to increase the risk of bleeding.

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg FX 2.5 sc once daily for 7 days. First postoperative dose was given ≥ 6 hours after closure of the surgical wound, and the second dose 18 to 24 hours after the first dose. Thereafter, daily at 8 PM ± 2 hours for 5 days.
EN: 40 mg EN sc once daily for 7 days. First dose was given 12 hours before surgery, and thereafter daily for 7 days.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: incidence of occurrence of VTE events (DVT, as determined by clinical assessment and compression Doppler) up to day 10

Primary safety outcome: Major bleeding, minor bleeding, no bleeding, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were monitored from day 0 up to day 37.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: no mention of use of any adjunctive anticoagulative method

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Randomized, open label"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, open‐label study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Quote: "open‐label" study

Comment: probably not done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "evaluator‐blind"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

85.7% and 95.7% of participants in the 2 study groups completed medication.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

Li 2015

Methods

Randomised controlled study

Participants

Total number of participants: 36

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux group: 18, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) group: 18

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: 0

Inclusion criteria: confirmed infection in trauma patients; hypercoagulopathy: prothrombin time (PT) < 3 seconds or longer than normal, abnormal international normalised ratio (INR) or activated partial prothrombin time (APTT) < 10 seconds or longer than normal; > 18 and < 70 years old; without haematological disorders; an informed consent

Exclusion criteria: anticoagulation therapy before enrolment; haematological or bleeding disorders; active or recent‐stroked peptic ulcer; malignant disease; diluting coagulopathy and low platelets counts; hepatic and renal failure

Interventions

Fondaparinux (FX): Participants in group F were given fondaparinux sodium (2.5 mg, 1/d for 11 d).

Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH): Participants in group L were given the standard LMWH (4100 U, 1/12 hours for 11 days) recipe and served as controls.

Outcomes

Endpoints of clinical observation were discharge and death. All participants were followed up for 3 months. Clinical parameters included deep vein thrombosis (DVT), bleeding events, occurrence of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and mortality. Laboratory parameters included serum fibrinogen, D‐dimer and antithrombin III. Observations were made on days 1, 3, 5, 7 and 11 after admission.
Major or minor bleeding events were monitored and recorded. Major bleeding events were defined as lethal or life‐threatening bleeding and intracranial or abdominal bleeding; minor ones consisted of occasional small bleeding that did not require further treatment.

Notes

Use of adjunctive prophylaxis methods: not reported

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Investigators used the randomisation sequence list to generate the random sequence.

This information was obtained by contacting the study authors.

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Investigators used the randomisation sequence list to generate the random sequence.

This information was obtained by contacting the study authors.

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Blinded to participants but not to healthcare staff

This information was obtained by contacting the study authors.

Comment: may affect participants' treatment and outcomes

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Blinded to outcome evaluator

This information was obtained by contacting the study authors.

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

100% of enrolled participants received responsive treatment, and data were analysed.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All endpoints listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Low risk

No risk of other bias was identified.

PEGASUS

Methods

Multi‐centre, multi‐national, randomised, double‐blind study

Participants

Total number of participants: 2927

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 1465, dalteparin (DA) group: 1462

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 127 (62 adverse events, 9 lack of efficacy, 56 other reasons), DA group: 119 (57 adverse events, 2 lack of efficacy, 60 other reasons)

Inclusion: Patients undergoing abdominal surgery under general anaesthesia, planned to last longer than 45 minutes (from incision to incision closure), and > 60 years of age with or without any other risk factor for VTE, or > 40 years of age and at risk for thromboembolic complications, were eligible. Patients at risk included those who were obese (body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2 for men and 28.6 kg/m2 for women), undergoing cancer surgery, with a history of DVT or PE, with congestive heart failure (CHF) (grade III or IV of the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification), with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or with inflammatory bowel disease

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the labelling of LMWH in force at the time study was conducted (e.g. active clinically significant bleeding, presence or history of low platelet count (< 100 x 109/L), medical condition associated with a bleeding risk, hypersensitivity to heparin or LMWH), or criteria related to contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 μmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or criteria related to trial methods (e.g. use of anticoagulant or fibrinolytic therapy within 2 days before first drug administration).

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg once daily given by sc injection up to day 7 ± 2, with the first injection between 6 and 7 hours after incision closure, provided haemostasis had been established
DA: 2500 IU sc 2 hours preoperatively and 12 hours after the preoperative injection (and at least 6 hours after incision closure), then DA 5000 IU (once daily sc) up to day 7 ± 2

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: VTE (asymptomatic and/or symptomatic DVT or PE or both) recorded until the time of screening venography or day 10, whichever occurred first. Secondary efficacy outcomes included individual events of total DVT, proximal DVT, distal DVT, symptomatic VTE up to day 10 and symptomatic VTE up to day 30 ± 2. Venography was considered positive if an intraluminal filling defect was seen on 2 different views, or after repeated injection of contrast medium; thrombi in the popliteal vein or above were considered proximal. A venogram was considered adequate if the entire deep venous system was visualised
from the calf veins to the common iliac vein in both legs.
Primary safety outcome: major bleeding detected between first injection of study drug (dalteparin or placebo) and 2 calendar days after last injection. Major bleeding was defined as fatal bleeding; bleeding that was retroperitoneal, intracranial or intraspinal or involved any other critical organ; bleeding leading to reoperation or intervention; and a bleeding index ≥ 2.0. The bleeding index was derived by adding the number of transfused units of packed red blood cells or whole blood to the difference in Hb level measured in grams per decilitre before and after a bleeding event. Secondary safety outcomes were death, other reported bleeding, thrombocytopenia and any other adverse events.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: The use of graded‐pressure elastic stockings was permitted.

Eleven (0.4 %) of 2858 participants were given a diagnosis of CHF at baseline. Results were not stratified by baseline illness, but owing to the small numbers, we decided to include this study.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "A multicenter, multinational, randomised, double‐blind study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "A multicenter, multinational, randomised, double‐blind study"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Patients given fondaparinux received a placebo injection 2 h before surgery ……received a placebo injection 6 h after surgery to correspond with the fondaparinux injection schedule"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote:"VTE outcomes evaluated (by an independent adjudicating committee)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

91.1% and 91.6% of patients in 2 study groups finished treatment.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

PENTAMAKS

Methods

Multi‐national, multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, parallel‐group study

Participants

Total number of participants: 1049

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 526, enoxaparin (EN) group: 523

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 36 (20 adverse events, 2 lack of efficacy, 7 withdrawn consent, 7 other reasons ), EN group: 36 (13 adverse events, 6 lack of efficacy, 11 withdrawn consent, 6 other reasons).

Inclusion: Study population had to conform to the following criteria: men or women (of non‐childbearing potential, i.e. postmenopausal or with hysterectomy or bilateral tubal ligation), or women of childbearing potential using highly effective birth control and having a negative pregnancy test within 48 hours before randomisation; aged ≥ 18 years; undergoing elective major knee surgery or revision of at least 1 component (enrolment of participants with surgery limited to an osteotomy was not permitted); and haemostasis established on the calendar day of surgery, no later than 8 hours after closure of the incision.

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the labelling of LMWH in force at the time study was conducted (e.g. active clinically significant bleeding, presence or history of low platelet count (< 100 x 109/L), medical condition associated with a bleeding risk), or criteria related to contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 µmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media).

Interventions

FX: Administration of FX (2.5 mg once daily as sc injection) started 6 ± 2 hours after surgical closure on day 1 (day of surgery).

EN: EN (30 mg twice daily as sc injection) at least 12 hours but less than 24 hours after surgical closure

To protect blinding (double‐dummy method), all participants received placebo to the active treatment they were not receiving. Study treatment was given up to 7 ± 2 days after surgical closure, or until the final venogram (positive unscheduled or mandatory) was obtained, whichever came first. Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 5 and day 11, but not more than 2 calendar days after the last study treatment administration.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of the following VTE outcomes recorded up to day 11: adjudicated venogram positive for DVT or adjudicated symptomatic or asymptomatic DVT; adjudicated non‐fatal PE or fatal PE. All venography procedures, scheduled and unscheduled, were adjudicated by a blinded Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC).

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding, which included fatal bleeding; bleeding that was retroperitoneal, intracranial or intraspinal or that involved any other critical organ; bleeding leading to reoperation; and overt bleeding with a bleeding index ≥ 2. The bleeding index was calculated as the number of units of packed red cells or whole blood transfused plus Hb values before the bleeding episode minus Hb values after the episode (in grams per decilitre). Secondary safety outcomes were death, other bleeding, need for transfusion, thrombocytopenia and any other adverse event.

Efficacy and safety outcomes were adjudicated by a central independent committee, whose members were unaware of treatment assignments, and included reviews of all venograms and reports of bleeding and death.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: In the FX group, 4 participants received prohibited treatment (anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents other than aspirin or thrombolytic therapy), 44 received discouraged treatment (non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory agents or aspirin) and 298 wore graduated compression stockings; in the EN group, 11 participants received prohibited treatment (anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents other than aspirin or thrombolytic therapy), 60 received discouraged treatment (non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory agents or aspirin) and 294 wore graduated compression stockings.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Immediately after surgery, patients were randomly assigned (in a ratio of 1:1 in blocks of four, stratified according to centre), through a central computer‐derived randomisation scheme"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Immediately after surgery, patients were randomly assigned (in a ratio of 1:1 in blocks of four, stratified according to centre), through a central computer‐derived randomisation scheme"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "To protect the blind (double‐dummy method) all subjects received placebo (PBO) to the active treatment they were not receiving"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "were adjudicated by a blinded Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

93% participants completed the study.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

PENTATHLON

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, parallel, dose‐ranging study of FX with an assessor‐blind, comparative control group of EN

Participants

Total number of participants: 950

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) 0.75 mg group: 185, FX 1.5 mg group: 190, FX 3.0 mg group: 181, FX 6.0 mg group: 73, FX 8.0 mg group: 52; enoxaparin (EN) 60 mg group: 269

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX 0.75 mg group: 14 (8 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 6 other reasons), FX 1.5 mg group: 15 (8 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 7 other reasons), FX 3.0 mg group: 13 (7 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 6 other reasons), FX 6.0 mg group: 12 (10 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 2 other reasons), FX 8.0 mg group: 13 (9 adverse events, 0 lack of efficacy, 4 for other reasons); EN group: 27 (18 adverse events, 1 lack of efficacy, 8 other reasons).

Inclusion: males and females of non‐childbearing potential ≥ 18 years of age undergoing elective primary hip replacement or revision of a primary procedure

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the labelling of LMWH in force at the time study was conducted (such as active clinically significant bleeding, presence or history of low platelet count (< 100 x 109/L) or known bleeding disorder), criteria related to venogram (such as creatinine clearance > 1.6 mg/dL; or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or use of anticoagulant or thrombolytic therapy 1 week before the start of the study.

Interventions

FX: Participants received a once daily sc injection of FX 0.75, 1.5, 3.0, 6.0 or 8.0 mg, starting 6 ± 2 hours postoperatively on day 1 (day of surgery).

EN: twice daily sc injection of EN 30 mg that started within 12 to 24 hours postoperatively (day 1 or day 2)

Participants were treated for a minimum of 5 days from day 1 until the final venogram was obtained, up to a maximum of 10 days.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: incidence of participants with adjudicated mandatory venogram positive for DVT and/or symptomatic adjudicated PE. Independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC) evaluated blindly all venograms and lung scans performed during the study.

Primary safety outcome: major bleeding; bleeding was defined as major if it was clinically overt and fatal, intracranial or retroperitoneal; involved a critical organ; or led to reoperation for bleeding or hematoma at the operative site. Overt bleeding was also defined as major if Hb levels declined by more than 2 grams per decilitre, if more than 2 units of packed red cells or whole blood was transfused or if the number of units transfused plus the decline in Hb level in grams per decilitre was greater than 2.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: not reported

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, parallel, dose ranging study of FX with an assessor‐blind, comparative control group of EN"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multicentre, randomised, parallel, dose ranging study of FX with an assessor‐blind, comparative control group of EN"

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Without clear description

Comment: unclear

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC) evaluated blindly all venograms and lung scans performed during the study"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

92.4%, 92%, 92.7%, 83.3%, 75% and 89.6% of participants in the 6 different treatment groups finished their treatment.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

PENTATHLON 2000

Methods

Multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind study

Participants

Total number of participants: 2275

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 1138, enoxaparin (EN) group: 1137

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 61 (33 adverse events, 4 lack of efficacy, 19 withdrawn consent, 5 other reasons ), EN group: 66 (35 adverse events, 2 lack of efficacy, 15 withdrawn consent, 14 other reasons)

Inclusion: Patients were eligible if they were undergoing an elective, primary, THR surgery or a revision of at least 1 component of a THR; > 18 years of age; men and women of non‐childbearing potential or women of childbearing potential using effective birth control with a negative pregnancy test within 48 hours before randomisation; haemostasis established on the calendar day of surgery, no later than 8 hours after incision closure; written informed consent

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the labelling of LMWH in force at the time study was conducted (e.g. active clinically significant bleeding, presence or history of low platelet count (< 100 x109/L), medical condition associated with a bleeding risk) or criteria related to contrast dyes during venography (e.g. serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL (180 µmol/L) or hypersensitivity to contrast media).

Interventions

FX: administration of FX (2.5 mg once daily as sc injection) started postoperatively at 6 ± 2 hours after surgical closure

EN: administration of EN (30 mg twice daily as sc injection) started postoperatively at least 12 hours but no more than 24 hours post surgical closure

Respective placebo to each drug was administered to protect the double‐blind (double‐dummy) method. Study treatment was given up to day 7 ± 2 (day 1 was the day of surgery) or until the final venogram (positive unscheduled or mandatory) was obtained, whichever came first. Mandatory venography had to be performed between day 5 and day 11, but not more than 2 calendar days after the last study treatment administration.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of the following VTE outcome results recorded up to day 11: adjudicated venogram positive for DVT or adjudicated symptomatic/asymptomatic DVT; and adjudicated PE. All venograms, scheduled and unscheduled, and other diagnostic tests (ultrasonography, ventilation/perfusion, lung scan, pulmonary angiography, spiral computed tomography scan, autopsy report, etc.) were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC).

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding (any Investigator‐reported unusual bleeding adjudicated as major or minor bleeding by the CIAC) recorded between first injection of study drug (active drug or placebo) and day 11. Major bleeding was defined as fatal bleeding; clinically overt bleeding including retroperitoneal or intracranial bleeding, or bleeding into a critical organ (eye, adrenal gland, pericardium, spine); reoperation due to bleeding/haematoma at the operative site; and clinically overt bleeding leading to a fall in Hb > 2 g/dL (1.6 mmol/L) and/or transfusion ≥ 2 units of packed red blood cells or whole blood AND for which the combined calculated index was > 2.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: use of graduated compression stockings and physiotherapy

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "a central computer‐derived randomisation scheme"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "a central computer‐derived randomisation scheme"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Respective placebo to each drug was administered to protect the double‐blind (double‐dummy method)"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC)"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

94.6% and 94.2% of participants in the 2 study groups finished their relative treatments.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

PENTHIFRA

Methods

Multi‐national, multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, double‐dummy, parallel‐group study

Participants

Total number of participants: 1711

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 849, enoxaparin (EN) group: 862

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 55 (29 adverse events, 1 lack of efficacy, 25 other reasons), EN group: 67 (32 adverse events, 2 lack of efficacy, 33 other reasons)

Inclusion: patients undergoing standard surgery for fracture of the upper third of the femur, including femoral head and neck, not more than 48 hours after admission; ≥ 18 years of age; men and women of non‐childbearing potential or women with a negative pregnancy test

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria were based on the labelling of LMWH in force at the time study was conducted (such as active clinically significant bleeding, presence or history of low platelet count (< 100 x 109/L) or known bleeding disorder), criteria related to venogram (such as creatinine clearance > 2.0 mg/dL; or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or use of anticoagulant or thrombolytic therapy during the screening period.

Interventions

FX: administration of FX (2.5 mg once daily as sc injection) started postoperatively (6 ± 2 hours after end of surgery)

EN: EN (40 mg once daily as sc injection) preoperatively (12 ± 2 hours before surgery) when surgery was planned within 24 hours after hospital admission

If surgery was delayed to 24 to 48 hours after admission, both study treatments were administered 12 ± 2 hours before the start of surgery. Study treatment was given up to day 7 ± 2 (day 1 was the day of surgery) or until the mandatory venogram was obtained, whichever came first. Mandatory venography had to be performed between days 5 and 11, but not more than 2 calendar days after the last study treatment administration.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of the following VTE outcome results recorded up to day 11: adjudicated venogram positive for DVT or adjudicated symptomatic/asymptomatic DVT; adjudicated non‐fatal and fatal PE. All venograms, scheduled and unscheduled, and other available diagnostic tests (ultrasonography, ventilation/perfusion lung scan, pulmonary angiography, spiral computed tomography scan, autopsy report, etc) were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the CIAC.

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding, which included fatal bleeding; bleeding that was retroperitoneal, intracranial or intraspinal or that involved any other critical organ; bleeding leading to reoperation; and overt bleeding with a bleeding index ≥ 2. The bleeding index was calculated as the number of units of packed red cells or whole blood transfused plus Hb values before the bleeding episode minus Hb values after the episode (in g/dL).

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: Use of graduated compression stockings and physiotherapy was recommended.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups in blocks of four, with stratification according to centre, with the use of a computer‐generated randomisation list"

Comment: probably done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Multi‐national, multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, double‐dummy, parallel‐group study

Comment: probably done

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "Study medications were packaged in boxes of identical appearance"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "were adjudicated blindly by independent experts of the CIAC"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

93.4% and 92% of participants in the 2 study groups finished the study.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

PENTHIFRA PLUS

Methods

Multi‐national, multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study

Participants

Total number of participants: 656

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 326, placebo group: 330

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 40 (20 adverse events, 2 lack of efficacy, 18 other reasons), placebo group: 46 (14 adverse events, 12 lack of efficacy, 20 for other reasons)

Inclusion: patients undergoing standard surgery for fracture of the upper third of the femur, including femoral head and neck, not more than 48 hours after admission; ≥ 18 years of age; men and women of non‐childbearing potential or women with a negative pregnancy test

Exclusion: Exclusion criteria included active clinically significant bleeding, or known bleeding disorder, criteria related to venography (such as creatinine clearance > 2.0 mg/dL; or hypersensitivity to contrast media) or use of anticoagulant or thrombolytic therapy during the screening period.

Interventions

Before randomisation, participants received open‐label fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily, sc postoperatively for 7 ± 1 days (day 1 = day of surgery). They then were randomised to receive double‐blind fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily sc for 21 ± 2 days or placebo.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: cluster of the following adjudicated VTE outcomes, evaluated from day 1 (first day of double‐blind treatment) to day 24 of postrandomisation period: mandatory venogram positive for DVT; symptomatic DVTs and/or adjudicated non‐fatal and fatal PE. During the study, the investigator had to perform appropriate evaluations in case of clinical suspicion of VTE. In the absence of previous confirmation of VTE, a mandatory venogram had to be performed between day 19 and day 24, but not more than 1 calendar day after the last study treatment administration. A Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC) adjudicated any diagnostic tests performed during the double‐blind period, and all reported bleedings and deaths.

Primary safety outcome: incidence of major bleeding rate

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: The use of graduated elastic stockings was permitted.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Quote: "Multinational, multicenter, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study"

Comment: probably done, as earlier reports from the same company clearly describe use of random sequences

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Double‐blind study with effective method to confirm blindness

Comment: probably done, as most earlier multi‐centre RCT reports clearly mentioned that studies of the same medicine organised by the same company were centrally randomised

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "For the double blind period, study medications were packaged in the boxes"

Comment: probably done

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "A Central Independent Adjudication Committee (CIAC) adjudicated any diagnostic tests performed during the double‐blind period, and all reported bleedings and deaths"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

87.7% and 86.1% of participants in 2 study groups finished treatment.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Unclear risk

Company sponsored

Shen 2014

Methods

Randomised controlled study

Participants

Total number of participants enrolled: 121

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 59, nadroparin calcium (NA) group: 57

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: not mentioned

Inclusion: clinical diagnosis of oesophageal carcinoma and planned for oesophagectomy; clinical diagnosis of lung carcinoma and planned for lung resection; general anaesthesia combined with epidural anaesthesia

Exclusion: blood clotting dysfunction before surgery; anticoagulating or antiplatelet history before surgery; low blood platelet count; haemorrhagic disease; cerebral haemorrhage; cerebral, spinal or ophthalmologic operation history; peptic ulcer; bleeding > 400 mL during operation; bleeding > 100 mL/h after operation; blood transfusion during or after operation; severe renal or liver dysfunction; severe hypertension

Interventions

FX: 2.5 mg IH once daily after operation

NA: nadroparin calcium 4100 AxaIU IH once daily after operation

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcomes: VTE events and drainage volume

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: not reported

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Study authors confirmed that they used the computer‐derived randomisation table.
Comment: low risk of bias

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Study authors confirmed that they used the computer‐derived randomisation table.
Comment: low risk of bias

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

The study publication did not clearly describe methods of blinding, and communication with study authors did not provide further information.

Comment: unclear

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Study authors confirmed that outcome assessors did not know the group information.
Comment: low risk of bias

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "A total of 121 patients were enrolled in this study, and 116 eligible patients were randomly assigned (Group H: 57 patients; Group F: 59 patients)"

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Unclear risk

Results of VTE rates were reported, but the number of events was not clearly reported. Drainage volumes of study participants were reported.

Other bias

Low risk

No risk of other bias was identified.

Yokote 2011

Methods

Randomised controlled trial

Participants

Total number of participants: 250

Number of participants allocated to each group: fondaparinux (FX) group: 85, enoxaparin (EN): 86, placebo group: 85

Number of participants excluded and/or lost to follow‐up: FX group: 1, EN group: 2, placebo group: 2

Inclusion: patients older than 20 years of age undergoing elective primary unilateral THR

Exclusion: patients who had undergone bilateral and revision THR. Other exclusion criteria included long‐term anticoagulation treatment such as unfractionated heparin, LMWH, vitamin K antagonists and antiplatelet agents for pre‐existing cardiac or cerebrovascular disease; history of VTE; coagulation disorder including antiphospholipid syndrome; presence of a solid malignant tumour or a peptic ulcer; and major surgery in the preceding 3 months. The study also excluded Caucasian patients.

Interventions

FX: postoperative sc injections of fondaparinux (2.5 mg once daily) for 10 consecutive days

EN: postoperative sc injections of enoxaparin (40 mg or 20 mg twice daily) for 10 consecutive days

Placebo: placebo (0.5 mL of isotonic saline) for 10 consecutive days

The first postoperative injections of fondaparinux, enoxaparin and saline took place at an average of 18 hours (SD 2), 17 hours (SD 2) and 18 hours (SD 2), respectively, after the operation.

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: incidence of DVT or VTE assessed by bilateral ultrasonographic studies from the external iliac vein to proximal portions of the calf veins at postoperative day 11. All scans were performed by experienced vascular technicians and were read by experienced radiologists who were blinded to participants' randomisation. Those with a negative scan were followed clinically for 12 weeks (until postoperative day 84) for signs or symptoms of DVT, pulmonary emboli or readmission to hospital because of a complication related to the chemical prophylaxis, a bleeding complication, a wound problem or any other clinical event. Participants who were found to have a distal (calf) DVT did not receive any chemical treatment. Those with proximal DVT received anticoagulant therapy, with initial administration of unfractionated heparin along with initiation of warfarin therapy.

Primary safety outcome: incidence of any bleeding, major or minor. This was assessed daily during the treatment period of 10 days and within 24 hours after completion or discontinuation of treatment. An episode of bleeding was classified as major if it was retroperitoneal, intracranial or intraocular, or if it was associated with death, transfusion of more than 2 units of packed red blood cells or whole blood (except autologous), a reduction in level of Hb > 2 g/dL or a serious or life‐threatening clinical event requiring medical intervention. Suspected intra‐abdominal or intracranial bleeding was confirmed by ultrasonography, CT or MRI. Minor episodes of bleeding were defined as those with at least 1 of the following features: epistaxis lasting longer than 5 minutes or requiring intervention, ecchymosis or haematoma with maximum size of > 5 cm, haematuria not associated with trauma from the urinary catheter, gastrointestinal haemorrhage not related to intubation or to passage of a nasogastric tube, wound haematoma or haemorrhagic wound complications not associated with major haemorrhage or subconjunctival haemorrhage, requiring cessation of medication.

Notes

Use of adjunctive anticoagulative methods: All participants received the same routine mechanical prophylaxis (intermittent pneumatic compression device and a thigh‐high elastic compression bandage) during and after operation.

Used for sensitivity analysis

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

The study did not clearly describe what randomisation method was used.

Comment: unclear

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

The study did not clearly describe what randomisation method was used and whether a strategy was used to confirm allocation concealment.

Comment: unclear

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

The study did not clearly describe blinding

Comment: unclear

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Quote: "All the scans were performed by experienced vascular technicians and were read by experienced radiologists who were blinded to the patient’s randomisation"

Comment: probably done

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

250 of 267 participants finished the study.

Comment: low risk of bias

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All primary efficacy and safety outcomes listed in the Methods section were reported.

Comment: low risk of bias

Other bias

Low risk

No risk of other bias was identified.

AE: adverse event.
APTT: activated partial thromboplastin time.
BI: bleeding index.
BMI: body mass index.
CG: control group.
CUS: compression ultrasonography.
DVT: deep vein thrombosis.
EBL: estimated blood loss.
IPC: intermittent pneumatic compression.
EN: enoxaparin.
FX: fondaparinux.
HES: hydroxy ethyl starch.
INR: international normalised ratio.
LMWH: low molecular weight heparin.
MRV: magnetic resonance venography.
NYHA: New York Heart Association.
PE: pulmonary embolism.
PT: prothrombin time.
PTT: partial thromboplastin time.
SAE: serious adverse event.
sc: subcutaneous.
SFJ: sapheno‐femoral junction.
SVT: superficial venous thrombosis.
THR: total hip replacement.
TKA: total knee arthroplasty.
TKR: total knee replacement.
VTE: venous thromboembolism.

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

ACT1840

Dose studied in the trial markedly extended the normal dose.

Amadeus 2008

Study investigated idraparinux for prevention of embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. Most thrombosis events in the study were arterial embolism, not venous thrombosis, and study results did not distinguish arterial embolism and venous thrombosis events.

AR3106206

This study focused on initial treatment of VTE, not on the prophylaxis of VTE.

AR3106333

Both groups in the study received fondaparinux therapy.

AR3106335

Both groups in the study received fondaparinux therapy.

Argun 2013

No reliable primary efficacy and safety results were reported.

Bonneux 2006

The study did not report on VTE evaluation methods. In addition, it did not report the outcome major bleeding and did not indicate whether the evaluator was blinded to group allocation.

Buller 2014

The study investigated idrabiotaparinux for prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. Study results did not distinguish between systemic embolism and venous thromboembolism.

Cassiopea

This study focused on initial treatment of VTE.

Cohen 2007

Both groups in the study received fondaparinux therapy.

EQUINOX

Both groups in the study received pentasaccharide therapy; 1 group received idraparinux, and the other received idrabiotaparinux.

extended van Gogh

This study focused on treatment of VTE.

FLEXTRA

Both groups in the study received fondaparinux therapy.

Kawaji 2012

This was not a randomised controlled study.

Li 2013

This study focused on fondaparinux for non‐ST elevation acute coronary syndromes, not for prevention of venous thrombosis.

MATISSE‐DVT

This study examined initial treatment of VTE, not prophylaxis of VTE.

MATISSE‐PE

This study examined initial treatment of VTE, not prophylaxis of VTE.

NCT00521885

This study was stopped owing to lack of accrual without outcomes reported.

NCT00539942

This study was terminated because of problems with accrual.

PENTATAK

Participants in all 5 study groups received fondaparinux therapy.

PERSIST

This study focused on initial treatment of VTE.

Rembrandt

This study examined initial treatment of VTE, not prophylaxis of VTE.

SAFE‐AF

This study focused on fondaparinux for anticoagulation treatment of electric cardioversion of atrial fibrillation that was mainly done to prevent arterial embolism.

Sasaki 2009

This was a quasi‐randomised study.

Sasaki 2011

This was a quasi‐randomised study.

Savi 2005

The outcome of the study was different from the outcomes that we studied.

Tsutsumi 2012

This was not a randomised controlled study.

van Gogh‐DVT

This study focused on initial treatment of VTE.

van Gogh‐PE

This study focused on initial treatment of VTE.

Xin 2013

This study focused on fondaparinux for non‐ST elevation acute coronary syndromes, not for prevention of venous thrombosis.

Yamaoka 2014

This was not a randomised controlled study.

Zhao 2013

This study focused on fondaparinux for non‐ST elevation acute coronary syndromes, not for prevention of venous thrombosis.

Zhao 2015

This study focused on fondaparinux for non‐ST elevation acute coronary syndromes, not for prevention of venous thrombosis.

VTE: venous thromboembolism.

Characteristics of ongoing studies [ordered by study ID]

EUCTR2007‐003746‐15‐DE

Trial name or title

Prospective randomised open study on the comparison of fondaparinux with the low‐molecular‐weight heparin enoxaparin in patients undergoing femoro‐distal venous bypass operation

Methods

Randomised controlled trial

Participants

Periperal arterial occlusive disease Fontaine IIb to IV

Possibility of venous bypass reconstruction with intended oral anticoagulation

Women with childbearing potential were included only when they were using correctly and consistently a highly effective method of birth control (i.e. Pearl‐Index < 1) during the study. Regarded as highly effective were sterilised women, vasectomised partner, combined oral contraceptives and hormone‐eluting IUDs.

Interventions

Trade name: Arixtra

Product name: Arixtra

Pharmaceutical form: anticoagulant and preservative solution for blood

INN or proposed INN: fondaparinux‐sodium

Concentration unit: mg/mL

Concentration number: 2.5/0.5

Trade name: Clexane

Product name: Clexane

Pharmaceutical form: anticoagulant and preservative solution for blood

INN or proposed INN: enoxaparin‐sodium

Concentration unit: mg/mL

Concentration number: 100

Outcomes

Primary endpoint(s):

  • Efficacy: postoperative bypass patency

  • Safety: major bleeding complications

Starting date

27 March 2008

Contact information

Notes

EUCTR2008‐001779‐31‐IT

Trial name or title

Markers of hypercoagulability and risk of death and rehospitalization in heart failure patients: a pilot study on the effects of fondaparinux ‐ fondaparinux and heart failure

Methods

Randomised placebo‐controlled trial

Participants

Diagnosis of heart failure according to the Framingham criteria (III to IV NYHA) for patients aged ≥ 60 years. Patients had a planned hospital stay ≥ 4 days.

Interventions

Trade name: ARIXTRA

Pharmaceutical form: solution for injection

INN or proposed INN: fondaparinux

Concentration unit: mg/mL milligram(s)/millilitre

Concentration type: equal

Concentration number: 5

Outcomes

Main objective: to evaluate the effects of fondaparinux on biochemical parameters and clinical events according to different duration of treatment in heart failure patients (III to IV NYHA). Primary endpoint: circulating D‐dimer plasma levels 2 months after enrolment

Primary endpoint(s): circulating D‐dimer plasma levels 2 months after enrolment

Secondary objective: secondary endpoints: circulating thrombin‐antithrombin complexes (TAT), prothrombin fragment 1+2 (F1+2), interleukin‐6 (IL‐6), C‐reactive protein (CRP), tumour necrosis factor‐alpha (TNF‐alpha) at discharge and 1, 2 and 12 months after enrolment. Circulating D‐dimer plasma levels at discharge and 1 and 12 months after enrolment. Total mortality, cardiovascular mortality and need for rehospitalisation 12 months after enrolment. Pulmonary emboly and/or deep vein thrombosis. Minor and major bleeding

Starting date

9 May 2008

Contact information

Notes

JPRN‐UMIN000002444

Trial name or title

Randomised study of anticoagulant therapy to prevent postoperative DVT/PE

Methods

Randomised double‐blind parallel trial

Participants

Patients older than 20 years of age after digestive surgery classified as at high risk of DVT/PE

Interventions

Fondaparinux 2.5 mg 1/d for 7 days

Enoxaparin 2000 IU 2/d for 7 days

Heparin sodium 5000 IU 2/d for 7 days

Outcomes

Primary efficacy outcome: frequency of VTE

Primary safety outcome: frequency of adverse events, including haemorrhage and abnormal serological findings

Starting date

1 September 2009

Contact information

[email protected]‐u.ac.jp

Notes

JPRN‐UMIN000007005

Trial name or title

The efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy Arixtra injection for the prevention of the vein thromboembolism in laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Methods

Randomised parallel open‐label study

Participants

Patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

Interventions

Fondaparinux and no intervention

Outcomes

Efficacy of the incidence of venous thromboembolism. Safety of the incidence of major bleeding

Starting date

10 January 2012

Contact information

Osaka Medical College

Notes

JPRN‐UMIN000008435

Trial name or title

Phase III study of efficacy of fondaparinux on the prevention of post‐operative venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing with laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery

Methods

Randomised controlled trial

Participants

Patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery with additional risk factor for VTE

Interventions

Once daily fondaparinux (2.5 mg or 1.5 mg) for 4 to 8 days after 24 hours of surgery

Intermittent pneumatic compression according to institutional guidelines

Outcomes

Incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE)

Incidence of major bleeding

Starting date

1 September 2012

Contact information

Multicenter Clinical Study Group of Osaka, Colorectal Cancer Treatment Group, 2‐2‐E2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565‐0871, Japan

Telephone number: 06‐6879‐3251

Notes

PROTECT

Trial name or title

Prophylaxis of thromboembolic complications trial: thromboprophylaxis needed in below knee plaster cast immobilisation for ankle and foot fractures (PROTECT)

Methods

Prospective, randomised, controlled, single‐blinded, multi‐centre trial

Participants

Patients 18 years of age or older with a non‐surgical fracture of the lower extremity requiring immobilisation in a below‐knee plaster cast for a minimum of 4 weeks

Interventions

One group receiving nadroparin (2850 IU anti‐Xa = 0.3 mL once daily), 1 group receiving fondaparinux (2.5 mg = 0.5 mL once daily) and 1 group receiving no prophylaxis

Outcomes

Primary outcome measure: deep vein trombosis as detected by venous duplex. Secondary outcome measure: bleeding complications

Starting date

13 April 2009

Contact information

[email protected]

Notes

CABG: coronary artery bypass graft.
DVT: deep vein thrombosis.
INN: international non‐proprietary name.
IU: international unit.
IUD: intrauterine device.
PE: pulmonary embolism.
VTE: venous thromboembolism.

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Fondaparinux versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

8

5717

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.15, 0.38]

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

8

6503

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.06, 0.36]

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

8

5715

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.40]

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

7

2746

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.12 [0.04, 0.39]

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.04, 0.62]

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.05, 1.03]

Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

8

6659

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.56 [1.48, 4.44]

Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

6

5993

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

10 MI Show forest plot

5

5777

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.03, 2.19]

Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 10 MI.

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

8

6674

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.48, 1.22]

Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

7

6581

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.77, 1.24]

Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 2. Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

9

5884

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.27 [0.17, 0.43]

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

9

6670

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.09, 0.42]

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

9

5882

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.28 [0.17, 0.45]

Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

8

2913

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.05, 0.51]

Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

9

6579

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.04, 0.62]

Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

9

6579

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

9

6579

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.05, 1.03]

Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

9

6829

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.56 [1.48, 4.44]

Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

7

6163

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

10 all causes of death Show forest plot

8

6766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.48, 1.22]

Analysis 2.10

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 10 all causes of death.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 10 all causes of death.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 3. Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

7

2715

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.40]

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

7

3501

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.05, 0.54]

Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

7

2713

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.43]

Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

7

2746

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.12 [0.04, 0.39]

Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

7

3412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.20 [0.04, 0.92]

Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

7

3410

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

7

3410

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [0.06, 2.93]

Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

7

3672

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.66 [1.52, 4.67]

Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

5

3006

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

10 MI Show forest plot

4

2790

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.01, 4.05]

Analysis 3.10

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 10 MI.

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

7

3672

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.73 [0.45, 1.18]

Analysis 3.11

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

6

3594

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.80, 1.32]

Analysis 3.12

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 4. Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

8

5717

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.15, 0.38]

Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

1.1 surgery patients

6

2071

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.21 [0.13, 0.35]

1.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.04, 0.50]

1.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.53 [0.31, 0.92]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

8

6503

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.06, 0.36]

Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

2.1 surgery patients

6

2857

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.05, 0.73]

2.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.04, 0.50]

2.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.65]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

8

5715

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.40]

Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

3.1 surgery patients

6

2069

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.21 [0.13, 0.35]

3.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.17 [0.05, 0.56]

3.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.35, 1.10]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

7

2745

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.12 [0.07, 0.22]

Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

4.1 surgery patients

6

2101

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.07 [0.03, 0.15]

4.2 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.23, 2.24]

5 total PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.04, 0.62]

Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

5.1 surgery patients

6

2766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.05, 2.14]

5.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.64]

5.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.65]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

6.1 surgery patients

6

2766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.01, 8.25]

6.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.65]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.05, 1.03]

Analysis 4.7

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

7.1 surgery patients

6

2766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [0.06, 2.93]

7.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.64]

7.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

8

6659

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.56 [1.48, 4.44]

Analysis 4.8

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

8.1 surgery patients

6

2833

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.78 [1.56, 4.95]

8.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.06, 15.86]

8.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.06, 15.52]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

6

5993

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

Analysis 4.9

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

9.1 surgery patients

4

2167

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

9.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 MI Show forest plot

5

5777

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.03, 2.19]

Analysis 4.10

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.

10.1 surgery patients

3

1951

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.01, 8.12]

10.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.01, 4.05]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

8

6674

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.48, 1.22]

Analysis 4.11

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

11.1 surgery patients

6

2833

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.09 [0.52, 2.31]

11.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.00 [0.18, 22.00]

11.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.29, 1.03]

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

7

6581

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.77, 1.24]

Analysis 4.12

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

12.1 surgery patients

5

2755

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.80, 1.38]

12.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.28, 1.36]

12.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.51, 1.69]

Open in table viewer
Comparison 5. Fondaparinux versus LMWH

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

11

9339

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.42, 0.73]

Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

9

12240

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.65, 1.63]

Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

10

9356

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.40, 0.71]

Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

9

8361

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.33, 1.02]

Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

10

12350

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

Analysis 5.5

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

Analysis 5.6

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

Analysis 5.7

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

11

12501

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.09, 1.75]

Analysis 5.8

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

6

10293

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

Analysis 5.9

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

10 MI Show forest plot

6

10720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.69, 2.37]

Analysis 5.10

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 10 MI.

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

11

12400

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

Analysis 5.11

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

12 death associated with VTE or bleeding Show forest plot

5

4774

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.38, 2.07]

Analysis 5.12

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.

13 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

10

12465

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.94, 1.19]

Analysis 5.13

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 6. Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

13

9709

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.57 [0.43, 0.74]

Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

11

12569

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.69, 1.70]

Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

12

9726

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.42, 0.72]

Analysis 6.3

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

10

8528

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.35, 1.06]

Analysis 6.4

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

12

12720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

Analysis 6.5

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

11

11477

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

Analysis 6.6

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

11

11486

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

Analysis 6.7

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

13

12874

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.34 [1.06, 1.68]

Analysis 6.8

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

8

10499

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

Analysis 6.9

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

10 all causes of death Show forest plot

12

12603

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

Analysis 6.10

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 10 all causes of death.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 10 all causes of death.

11 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

11

12707

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.95, 1.20]

Analysis 6.11

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 11 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 11 other serious adverse effects.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 7. Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

10

9141

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.41, 0.73]

Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

8

12042

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.65, 1.63]

Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

9

9158

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.53 [0.40, 0.71]

Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

8

8163

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.31, 1.03]

Analysis 7.4

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

9

12152

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

Analysis 7.5

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

8

10909

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

Analysis 7.6

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

8

10909

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

Analysis 7.7

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

10

12303

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.09, 1.75]

Analysis 7.8

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

5

10095

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

Analysis 7.9

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

10 MI Show forest plot

6

10720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.69, 2.37]

Analysis 7.10

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 10 MI.

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

10

12202

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

Analysis 7.11

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

12 death associated with VTE or bleeding Show forest plot

5

4774

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.38, 2.07]

Analysis 7.12

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.

13 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

9

12267

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.95, 1.20]

Analysis 7.13

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 8. Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

11

9339

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.42, 0.73]

Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

1.1 orthopaedic patients

8

7057

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.38, 0.70]

1.2 abdominal surgery

1

2048

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.52, 1.09]

1.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.14, 6.82]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

9

12240

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.65, 1.63]

Analysis 8.2

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

2.1 orthopaedic patients

6

9079

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.61, 1.65]

2.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.20 [0.37, 3.92]

2.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

10

9356

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.40, 0.71]

Analysis 8.3

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

3.1 orthopaedic patients

7

7080

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.50 [0.37, 0.69]

3.2 abdominal surgery

1

2042

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.49, 1.06]

3.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.14, 6.82]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

9

8361

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.33, 1.02]

Analysis 8.4

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

4.1 orthopaedic patients

6

5974

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.26, 1.02]

4.2 abdominal surgery

1

2153

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.29, 3.45]

4.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.14, 6.82]

5 total PE Show forest plot

10

12350

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

Analysis 8.5

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

5.1 orthopaedic patients

7

9189

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.14 [0.56, 2.34]

5.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.66 [0.40, 6.95]

5.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

Analysis 8.6

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

6.1 orthopaedic patients

6

7946

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.14, 2.29]

6.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.20, 4.94]

6.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

Analysis 8.7

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

7.1 orthopaedic patients

6

7946

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.22 [0.53, 2.83]

7.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.99 [0.24, 103.84]

7.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.4 bariatric surgery

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

11

12501

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.09, 1.75]

Analysis 8.8

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

8.1 orthopaedic patients

8

9409

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.03, 1.84]

8.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.43 [0.93, 2.21]

8.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.01, 7.68]

8.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

7

10329

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

Analysis 8.9

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

9.1 orthopaedic patients

4

7237

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.01, 8.28]

9.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.14, 7.05]

9.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 MI Show forest plot

6

10720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.69, 2.37]

Analysis 8.10

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.

10.1 orthopaedic patients

5

7862

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.21 [0.61, 2.39]

10.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.66 [0.40, 6.92]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

11

12400

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

Analysis 8.11

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

11.1 orthopaedic patients

8

9308

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.64, 1.35]

11.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.38, 1.45]

11.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

10

12470

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.95, 1.19]

Analysis 8.12

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

12.1 orthopaedic patients

8

9414

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.89, 1.19]

12.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.14 [0.92, 1.41]

12.3 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.33, 2.93]

Open in table viewer
Comparison 9. Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.3

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.4

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.5

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.6

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

7 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.7

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 10. Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.3

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.4

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.5

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.6

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

7 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.7

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 11. Fondaparinux versus edoxaban

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 11.2

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 2 major bleeding.

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 2 major bleeding.

3 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 11.3

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 3 all causes of death.

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 3 all causes of death.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 12. Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.1

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.2

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

3 total DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.3

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.4

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

5 total PE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.5

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 5 total PE.

6 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.6

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

7 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.7

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

8 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.8

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 8 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 8 other serious adverse effects.

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 fondaparinux versus placebo, outcome: 1.1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 fondaparinux versus placebo, outcome: 1.1 total VTE.

Funnel plot of comparison: 5 fondaparinux versus LMWH, outcome: 5.1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Funnel plot of comparison: 5 fondaparinux versus LMWH, outcome: 5.1 total VTE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 10 MI.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 11 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Fondaparinux versus placebo, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 10 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.10

Comparison 2 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011, Outcome 10 all causes of death.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 10 MI.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.10

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 11 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.11

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.12

Comparison 3 Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.7

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.8

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.9

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.10

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.11

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.12

Comparison 4 Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.5

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.6

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.7

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.8

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.9

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 10 MI.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.10

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 11 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.11

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.12

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.13

Comparison 5 Fondaparinux versus LMWH, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.3

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.4

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.5

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.6

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.7

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.8

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.9

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 10 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.10

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 10 all causes of death.

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 11 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.11

Comparison 6 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis, Outcome 11 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.4

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.5

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.6

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.7

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.8

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.9

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 10 MI.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.10

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 11 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.11

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.12

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 12 death associated with VTE or bleeding.

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.13

Comparison 7 Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT, Outcome 13 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.2

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.3

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.4

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.5

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.6

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 6 fatal PE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.7

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 7 non‐fatal PE.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.8

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 8 major bleeding.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.9

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 9 fatal bleeding.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.10

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 10 MI.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.11

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 11 all causes of death.

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.12

Comparison 8 Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis, Outcome 12 other serious adverse effects.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.3

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.4

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.5

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.6

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.7

Comparison 9 Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.3

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.4

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.5

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.6

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.7

Comparison 10 Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 2 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.2

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 2 major bleeding.

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 3 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.3

Comparison 11 Fondaparinux versus edoxaban, Outcome 3 all causes of death.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 1 total VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.1

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 1 total VTE.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.2

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 2 symptomatic VTE.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 3 total DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.3

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 3 total DVT.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.4

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 4 proximal DVT.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 5 total PE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.5

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 5 total PE.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 6 major bleeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.6

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 6 major bleeding.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 7 all causes of death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.7

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 7 all causes of death.

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 8 other serious adverse effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.8

Comparison 12 Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis, Outcome 8 other serious adverse effects.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Fondaparinux versus placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Fondaparinux versus placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Patient or population: people requiring prevention of venous thromboembolism
Settings: hospital and outpatient
Intervention: fondaparinux versus placebo

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

Number of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Placebo

Fondaparinux

Total VTE

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.24
(0.15 to 0.38)

5717
(8 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1,2

91 per 1000

22 per 1000
(14 to 34)

Moderate

181 per 1000

43 per 1000
(27 to 69)

Symptomatic VTE

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.15
(0.06 to 0.36)

6503
(8 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high2,3

12 per 1000

2 per 1000
(1 to 4)

Moderate

7 per 1000

1 per 1000
(0 to 3)

Total DVT

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.25
(0.15 to 0.4)

5715
(8 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1,2

87 per 1000

22 per 1000
(13 to 35)

Moderate

173 per 1000

43 per 1000
(26 to 69)

Proximal DVT

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.12
(0.04 to 0.39)

2746
(7 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1,2,3

60 per 1000

7 per 1000
(2 to 23)

Moderate

54 per 1000

6 per 1000
(2 to 21)

Total PE

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.16
(0.04 to 0.62)

6412
(8 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high2,3

5 per 1000

1 per 1000
(0 to 3)

Moderate

1 per 1000

0 per 1000
(0 to 1)

Major bleeding

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 2.56
(1.48 to 4.44)

6659
(8 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate2,4

5 per 1000

12 per 1000
(7 to 21)

Moderate

3 per 1000

8 per 1000
(4 to 13)

All causes of death

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.76
(0.48 to 1.22)

6674
(8 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate2,5

12 per 1000

9 per 1000
(6 to 15)

Moderate

0 per 1000

0 per 1000
(0 to 0)

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PE: pulmonary embolism; RR: risk ratio; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Data were pooled with a random‐effects model owing to heterogeneity ‐ downgraded by one level.
2 All studies were published in English; most studies were organised by a pharmaceutical company and could indicate potential publication bias, but we did not deem this sufficient to downgrade the quality of the evidence.
3 Small number of events but no imprecision of effect estimate, therefore not downgraded.
4 Small number of events causing wide CI ‐ downgraded by one level.
5 Small number of events; many studies do not contribute to effect estimate ‐ downgraded by one level for imprecision.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Fondaparinux versus placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism
Summary of findings 2. Fondaparinux versus LMWH for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Fondaparinux versus LMWH for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Patient or population: people requiring prevention of venous thromboembolism
Settings: hospital
Intervention: fondaparinux versus LMWH

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

Number of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

LMWH

Fondaparinux

Total VTE

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.55
(0.42 to 0.73)

9339
(11 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1,2

108 per 1000

60 per 1000
(46 to 79)

Moderate

83 per 1000

46 per 1000
(35 to 61)

Symptomatic VTE

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 1.03
(0.65 to 1.63)

12240
(9 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate2,3

6 per 1000

6 per 1000
(4 to 9)

Moderate

3 per 1000

3 per 1000
(2 to 5)

Total DVT

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.54
(0.4 to 0.71)

9356
(10 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1,2

106 per 1000

57 per 1000
(42 to 75)

Moderate

86 per 1000

46 per 1000
(34 to 61)

Proximal DVT

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.58
(0.33 to 1.02)

8361
(9 studies)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2,3

23 per 1000

13 per 1000
(7 to 23)

Moderate

25 per 1000

14 per 1000
(8 to 25)

Total PE

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 1.24
(0.65 to 2.34)

12350
(10 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate2,3

3 per 1000

3 per 1000
(2 to 6)

Moderate

1 per 1000

1 per 1000
(1 to 2)

Major bleeding

Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 1.38
(1.09 to 1.75)

12501
(11 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high2

18 per 1000

25 per 1000
(19 to 31)

Moderate

23 per 1000

32 per 1000
(25 to 40)

All causes of death
Follow‐up: 7‐45 days

Study population

RR 0.88
(0.63 to 1.22)

12400
(11 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate2,4

12 per 1000

10 per 1000
(7 to 15)

Moderate

3 per 1000

3 per 1000
(2 to 4)

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PE: pulmonary embolism; RR: risk ratio; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Data were pooled with the random‐effects model because of heterogeneity ‐ downgraded by one level.
2 All studies were written in English; most studies were funded by a pharmaceutical company, which could indicate potential publication bias but we did not deem this sufficient to downgrade the quality of the evidence.
3 Few events leading to wide confidence interval ‐ downgraded by one level.
4 Small number of events; many studies do not contribute to effect estimate ‐ downgraded by one level for imprecision.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 2. Fondaparinux versus LMWH for the prevention of venous thromboembolism
Summary of findings 3. Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Patient or population: patients requiring prevention of venous thromboembolism
Settings: hospital
Intervention: fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

Number of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Variable dose warfarin

Fondaparinux

Total VTE

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No VTE events recorded

Symptomatic VTE

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No VTE events recorded

Total DVT

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No DVT events recorded

Proximal DVT

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No proximal DVT events recorded

Total PE

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No PE events recorded

Major bleeding

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

Study population

RR 7
(0.37 to 134.05)

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No cases of bleeding (0/118) were reported in the variable warfarin group. Three cases (3/118) of bleeding were reported in the fondaparinux group.

All causes of death

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No deaths recorded

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PE: pulmonary embolism; RR: risk ratio; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 One study was included in this comparison; the study sample was small, and the events were rare ‐ downgraded by three levels.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 3. Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism
Summary of findings 4. Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Patient or population: people requiring prevention of venous thromboembolism
Settings: hospital
Intervention: fondaparinux versus 1mg warfarin

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

Number of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

1 mg warfarin

Fondaparinux

Total VTE

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

Study population

RR 0.2
(0.01 to 4.12)

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

17 per 1000

3 per 1000
(0 to 70)

Moderate

17 per 1000

3 per 1000
(0 to 70)

Symptomatic VTE

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No systematic VTE events recorded

Total DVT

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

Study population

RR 0.2
(0.01 to 4.12)

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

17 per 1000

3 per 1000
(0 to 70)

Moderate

17 per 1000

3 per 1000
(0 to 70)

Proximal DVT

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No proximal DVT events recorded

Total PE

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No PE events recorded

Major bleeding

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

Study population

RR 3
(0.32 to 28.43)

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

8 per 1000

25 per 1000
(3 to 241)

Moderate

9 per 1000

27 per 1000
(3 to 256)

All causes of death

Follow‐up: mean 28 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

236
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No deaths recorded

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PE: pulmonary embolism; RR: risk ratio; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 One study was included in this comparison; the study sample was small, and the events were rare ‐ downgraded by three levels.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 4. Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism
Summary of findings 5. Fondaparinux versus edoxaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Fondaparinux versus edoxaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Patient or population: people requiring prevention of venous thromboembolism
Settings: hospital
Intervention: fondaparinux versus edoxaban

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

Number of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Edoxaban

Fondaparinux

Total VTE

Follow‐up: 25 to 35 days after treatment completion

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

38
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No VTE events recorded

Symptomatic VTE

Follow‐up: 25 to 35 days after treatment completion

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

38
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No VTE events recorded

Total DVT

Follow‐up: 25 to 35 days after treatment completion

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

38
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No DVT events recorded

Proximal DVT

Follow‐up: 25 to 35 days after treatment completion

See comment

See comment

38
(1 study)

Proximal DVT not an outcome of this study

Total PE

Follow‐up: 25 to 35 days after treatment completion

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

38
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No PE events recorded

Major bleeding

Follow‐up: 25 to 35 days after treatment completion

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

38
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No major bleeding events recorded

All causes of death

Follow‐up: 25 to 35 days after treatment completion

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

38
(1 study)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1

No deaths recorded

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PE: pulmonary embolism; RR: risk ratio; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 One study was included in this comparison; the study sample was small, and no events were recorded ‐ downgraded by three levels.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 5. Fondaparinux versus edoxaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism
Summary of findings 6. Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis for the prevention of venous thromboembolism

Patient or population: people requiring prevention of venous thromboembolism
Settings: hospital and outpatient
Intervention: fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

Number of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Mechanical thromboprophylaxis

Fondaparinux

Total VTE

Follow‐up: 4 to 8 days

Study population

RR 0.61
(0.22 to 1.67)

99
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

176 per 1000

108 per 1000
(39 to 295)

Moderate

177 per 1000

108 per 1000
(39 to 296)

Symptomatic VTE

Follow‐up: 4 to 8 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

120
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

No cases of symptomatic VTE recorded

Total DVT

Follow‐up: 4 to 8 days

Study population

RR 0.63
(0.23 to 1.72)

100
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

171 per 1000

108 per 1000
(39 to 295)

Moderate

171 per 1000

108 per 1000
(39 to 294)

Proximal DVT

Follow‐up: 4 to 8 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

105
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

No cases of proximal DVT recorded

Total PE

Follow‐up: 4 to 8 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

120
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

No cases of PE recorded

Major bleeding

Follow‐up: 4 to 8 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

120
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

No cases of major bleeding recorded

All causes of death

Follow‐up: 4 to 8 days

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

120
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

No deaths recorded

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PE: pulmonary embolism; RR: risk ratio; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 One study included in this comparison, small study sample, funded by pharmaceutical company, very short follow‐up ‐ downgraded by two levels.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 6. Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis for the prevention of venous thromboembolism
Comparison 1. Fondaparinux versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

8

5717

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.15, 0.38]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

8

6503

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.06, 0.36]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

8

5715

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.40]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

7

2746

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.12 [0.04, 0.39]

5 total PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.04, 0.62]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.05, 1.03]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

8

6659

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.56 [1.48, 4.44]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

6

5993

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

10 MI Show forest plot

5

5777

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.03, 2.19]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

8

6674

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.48, 1.22]

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

7

6581

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.77, 1.24]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Fondaparinux versus placebo
Comparison 2. Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

9

5884

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.27 [0.17, 0.43]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

9

6670

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.09, 0.42]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

9

5882

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.28 [0.17, 0.45]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

8

2913

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.05, 0.51]

5 total PE Show forest plot

9

6579

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.04, 0.62]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

9

6579

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

9

6579

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.05, 1.03]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

9

6829

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.56 [1.48, 4.44]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

7

6163

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

10 all causes of death Show forest plot

8

6766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.48, 1.22]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis inserting Yokote 2011
Comparison 3. Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

7

2715

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.40]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

7

3501

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.05, 0.54]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

7

2713

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.43]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

7

2746

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.12 [0.04, 0.39]

5 total PE Show forest plot

7

3412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.20 [0.04, 0.92]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

7

3410

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

7

3410

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [0.06, 2.93]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

7

3672

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.66 [1.52, 4.67]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

5

3006

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

10 MI Show forest plot

4

2790

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.01, 4.05]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

7

3672

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.73 [0.45, 1.18]

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

6

3594

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.80, 1.32]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. Fondaparinux versus placebo sensitivity analysis excluding CALISTO
Comparison 4. Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

8

5717

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.15, 0.38]

1.1 surgery patients

6

2071

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.21 [0.13, 0.35]

1.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.04, 0.50]

1.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.53 [0.31, 0.92]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

8

6503

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.06, 0.36]

2.1 surgery patients

6

2857

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.05, 0.73]

2.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.04, 0.50]

2.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.65]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

8

5715

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.15, 0.40]

3.1 surgery patients

6

2069

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.21 [0.13, 0.35]

3.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.17 [0.05, 0.56]

3.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.35, 1.10]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

7

2745

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.12 [0.07, 0.22]

4.1 surgery patients

6

2101

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.07 [0.03, 0.15]

4.2 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.23, 2.24]

5 total PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.16 [0.04, 0.62]

5.1 surgery patients

6

2766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.05, 2.14]

5.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.64]

5.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.65]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.17]

6.1 surgery patients

6

2766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.01, 8.25]

6.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.65]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

8

6412

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.05, 1.03]

7.1 surgery patients

6

2766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [0.06, 2.93]

7.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [0.01, 1.64]

7.3 medically ill patients

1

644

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

8

6659

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.56 [1.48, 4.44]

8.1 surgery patients

6

2833

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.78 [1.56, 4.95]

8.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.06, 15.86]

8.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.06, 15.52]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

6

5993

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

9.1 surgery patients

4

2167

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.87 [0.58, 40.81]

9.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 MI Show forest plot

5

5777

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.03, 2.19]

10.1 surgery patients

3

1951

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.01, 8.12]

10.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.19 [0.01, 4.05]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

8

6674

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.48, 1.22]

11.1 surgery patients

6

2833

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.09 [0.52, 2.31]

11.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

3002

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.00 [0.18, 22.00]

11.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.29, 1.03]

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

7

6581

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.77, 1.24]

12.1 surgery patients

5

2755

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.80, 1.38]

12.2 superficial thrombophlebitis

1

2987

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.28, 1.36]

12.3 medically ill patients

1

839

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.51, 1.69]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 4. Fondaparinux versus placebo subgroup analysis
Comparison 5. Fondaparinux versus LMWH

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

11

9339

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.42, 0.73]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

9

12240

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.65, 1.63]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

10

9356

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.40, 0.71]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

9

8361

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.33, 1.02]

5 total PE Show forest plot

10

12350

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

11

12501

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.09, 1.75]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

6

10293

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

10 MI Show forest plot

6

10720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.69, 2.37]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

11

12400

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

12 death associated with VTE or bleeding Show forest plot

5

4774

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.38, 2.07]

13 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

10

12465

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.94, 1.19]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 5. Fondaparinux versus LMWH
Comparison 6. Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

13

9709

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.57 [0.43, 0.74]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

11

12569

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.69, 1.70]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

12

9726

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.42, 0.72]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

10

8528

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.35, 1.06]

5 total PE Show forest plot

12

12720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

11

11477

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

11

11486

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

13

12874

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.34 [1.06, 1.68]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

8

10499

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

10 all causes of death Show forest plot

12

12603

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

11 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

11

12707

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.95, 1.20]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 6. Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis
Comparison 7. Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

10

9141

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.41, 0.73]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

8

12042

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.65, 1.63]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

9

9158

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.53 [0.40, 0.71]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

8

8163

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.31, 1.03]

5 total PE Show forest plot

9

12152

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

8

10909

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

8

10909

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

10

12303

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.09, 1.75]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

5

10095

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

10 MI Show forest plot

6

10720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.69, 2.37]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

10

12202

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

12 death associated with VTE or bleeding Show forest plot

5

4774

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.38, 2.07]

13 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

9

12267

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.95, 1.20]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 7. Fondaparinux versus LMWH sensitivity analysis without EFFORT
Comparison 8. Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

11

9339

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.42, 0.73]

1.1 orthopaedic patients

8

7057

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.38, 0.70]

1.2 abdominal surgery

1

2048

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.52, 1.09]

1.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.14, 6.82]

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

9

12240

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.65, 1.63]

2.1 orthopaedic patients

6

9079

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.61, 1.65]

2.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.20 [0.37, 3.92]

2.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 total DVT Show forest plot

10

9356

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.40, 0.71]

3.1 orthopaedic patients

7

7080

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.50 [0.37, 0.69]

3.2 abdominal surgery

1

2042

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.49, 1.06]

3.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.14, 6.82]

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

9

8361

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.33, 1.02]

4.1 orthopaedic patients

6

5974

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.52 [0.26, 1.02]

4.2 abdominal surgery

1

2153

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.29, 3.45]

4.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.14, 6.82]

5 total PE Show forest plot

10

12350

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.65, 2.34]

5.1 orthopaedic patients

7

9189

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.14 [0.56, 2.34]

5.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.66 [0.40, 6.95]

5.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.25, 2.05]

6.1 orthopaedic patients

6

7946

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.14, 2.29]

6.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.20, 4.94]

6.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 non‐fatal PE Show forest plot

9

11107

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.63, 3.11]

7.1 orthopaedic patients

6

7946

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.22 [0.53, 2.83]

7.2 abdominal surgery

1

2927

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.99 [0.24, 103.84]

7.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7.4 bariatric surgery

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 major bleeding Show forest plot

11

12501

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.09, 1.75]

8.1 orthopaedic patients

8

9409

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.38 [1.03, 1.84]

8.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.43 [0.93, 2.21]

8.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.01, 7.68]

8.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 fatal bleeding Show forest plot

7

10329

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.14, 3.62]

9.1 orthopaedic patients

4

7237

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.01, 8.28]

9.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.14, 7.05]

9.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 MI Show forest plot

6

10720

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.69, 2.37]

10.1 orthopaedic patients

5

7862

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.21 [0.61, 2.39]

10.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.66 [0.40, 6.92]

11 all causes of death Show forest plot

11

12400

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.63, 1.22]

11.1 orthopaedic patients

8

9308

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.64, 1.35]

11.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.38, 1.45]

11.3 ICU patients

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11.4 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

10

12470

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.95, 1.19]

12.1 orthopaedic patients

8

9414

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.89, 1.19]

12.2 abdominal surgery

1

2858

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.14 [0.92, 1.41]

12.3 bariatric surgery patients

1

198

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.33, 2.93]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 8. Fondaparinux versus LMWH subgroup analysis
Comparison 9. Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 total DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 total PE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 9. Fondaparinux versus variable dose warfarin
Comparison 10. Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 total DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 total PE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 10. Fondaparinux versus 1 mg warfarin
Comparison 11. Fondaparinux versus edoxaban

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 11. Fondaparinux versus edoxaban
Comparison 12. Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 total VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 symptomatic VTE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 total DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 proximal DVT Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 total PE Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 major bleeding Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 all causes of death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8 other serious adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 12. Fondaparinux versus mechanical thromboprophylaxis