Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine logoLink to Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine
. 2022 Jul 26;2022:1248577. doi: 10.1155/2022/1248577

Efficacy of Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Preventing Perinatal Venous Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis

Yan Huang 1, Fei Li 2, Changhong Li 1, Xueli Liao 3,✉
PMCID: PMC9345706  PMID: 35928971

Abstract

Background

There have been controversies about the preventive effect of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on venous thrombosis (VT) in the perinatal period. This study is aimed at exploring the effectiveness of LMWH in preventing perinatal VT through meta-analysis.

Methods

Databases such as CNKI, China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc), Wanfang, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Central were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) subjects: women at high risk of perinatal VT; (2) experimental group and control group; (3) intervention measures: the experimental group was given LMWH, while the control group was given placebo or standard heparin or physical therapy; (4) outcomes: perinatal VT events or bleeding events; and (5) randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Jadad scale was used to evaluate the literature quality. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The chi-square test was used to analyze the heterogeneity of the included literature. Subgroup analysis was used to explore the source of heterogeneity. Publication bias was evaluated via funnel plot and Egger test.

Results

The incidence of perinatal VT in the LMWH group was lower than that in the control group (OR = 0.16, 95% CI (0.08, 0.32), P < 0.00001). There was no heterogeneity among literatures (P = 0.77, I2 = 0%) and no publication bias. The incidence of postpartum VT in the LMWH group was lower than that in the control group (OR = 0.14, 95% CI (0.07, 0.30), P < 0.00001). There was no heterogeneity among literatures (P = 0.69, I2 = 0%) and no publication bias. The incidence of perinatal bleeding in the LMWH group was higher than in the control group (OR = 1.72, 95% CI (1.06, 2.77), P = 0.03). There was no heterogeneity among literatures (P = 0.25, I2 = 26%) and no publication bias.

Conclusion

LMWH can reduce the incidence of perinatal VT in high-risk women but increase the risk of bleeding. The use of LMWH to prevent perinatal VT should be closely monitored.

1. Introduction

Perinatal venous thromboembolism (VT) is the leading cause of maternal death in developed countries [1–3]. The increase in gestational weeks increases the risk of VT [4, 5], and the peak period of VT occurs within 6 weeks after delivery [6]. However, the pathogenesis of VT is not clear. VT is a disease caused by multiple factors [7–9], which may be related to specific gene expression [10, 11]. In addition, pregnancy itself is a high-risk factor for VT [3–5, 12]. Changes in estrogen and progesterone levels during pregnancy lead to vasodilatation of lower limb veins [3, 5]. The enlarged uterus oppresses the pelvic vein and causes blood stasis [4, 5]. Coagulation factors are activated during pregnancy, and the serum level is significantly increased [5]. A series of physiological changes significantly increased the risk of perinatal VT. Besides, the perinatal period is often associated with many other clinical risk factors, such as obesity, braking, history of VT, and cesarean section. When multiple risk factors are superimposed, pregnant women need closer monitoring and timely preventive measures [3].

The anticoagulation effect of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is better than that of unfractionated heparin by reducing the risk of bleeding [13–15]. Compared with unfractionated heparin, complications such as osteoporosis and thrombocytopenia are rarer in patients using LMWH [15, 16]. Therefore, LMWH is easy to use, with high bioavailability, a long half-life, stable pharmacokinetics, and no need for frequent monitoring [17, 18].

Previous studies have been controversial about the preventive effect of LMWH on perinatal VT. Studies [19] have pointed out that LMWH cannot reduce the incidence of perinatal VT events and may increase the risk of bleeding. Other studies [20] held different views. LMWH could effectively prevent VT events in high-risk pregnant women after cesarean section and reduce fibrinogen levels [20]. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to explore the preventive effect of LMWH on perinatal VT.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Literature Search

We searched in CNKI, China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc), Wanfang, PubMed, Medline, Embase, Central, and other databases. The search terms included low molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin, nadroparin, dalteparin, tinzaparin, pregnancy, perinatal stage, postpartum, venous thrombosis, thrombogenesis, and thromboembolism. The deadline for the literature search was June 1, 2022. No document language was limited.

2.2. Literature Screening

Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) subjects: perinatal VT high-risk women. Pregnant women with one or more of the following risk factors are considered to be a population with high risk of perinatal VT: history of thromboembolism, gestational hypertension, diabetes, advanced age, obesity, multiple births, or smoking; (2) the experimental group and the control group were set up; (3) intervention measures: the experimental group was given LMWH to prevent perinatal VT, and the control group was given placebo or unfractionated heparin or physical therapy to prevent perinatal VT; (4) outcomes: including perinatal VT events or bleeding events; and (5) randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) repeated reports, (2) animal experiments, (3) the subjects received other anticoagulant drugs, (4) observational studies, and (5) the key data in the literature were missing and could not be supplemented.

2.3. Data Extraction and Literature Quality Evaluation

Researchers read the full text and extracted the data. The extracted contents included the number of cases, basic diseases, mode of delivery, intervention measures, drug types, drug doses, the incidence of VT, and bleeding events. The Jadad scale was used to evaluate the quality of literature, including the generation of random groups, randomized hidden blind method, implementation of a blind method, loss of follow-up, and withdrawal. Two researchers carried out the above work independently and made crosscomparison after completing the work. If there were differences, the two authors discussed and reached an agreement.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The results of the included studies were meta-analyzed using the Cochrane software RevMan5.3. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect quantities. OR and 95% CI were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel statistical method. The chi-square test was used to analyze the heterogeneity of the included literature. I2 < 50% and P > 0.10 indicated no heterogeneity among the literature, and the fixed effect model was used. I2 ≥ 50% or P ≤ 0.10 indicated heterogeneity among the literature. Subgroup analysis was used to explore the source of heterogeneity. If it was impossible to clarify the heterogeneity source and eliminate it, the literature results were combined or summarized using the random effect model. A funnel test was used to evaluate publication bias. Two-way P < 0.05 meant statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Literature Screening

A total of 674 literatures were retrieved. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 663 literature were excluded, and 11 literature were included in this meta-analysis [19–29]. This study included 1512 high-risk women with perinatal VT, with 758 cases in the LMWH group and 754 cases in the control group. The flow chart of literature screening is shown in Figure 1. The literature characteristics and quality evaluation are shown in Table 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Document screening flow chart.

Table 1.

Basic characteristics and Jadad score of included literature.

Author Year No. of patients Study type Intervention Outcomes Jadad
LMWH Control LMWH Control
Badawy et al. [21] 2008 170 170 RCT Enoxaparin sodium (0.2 ml, once daily) + folic acid tablets (0.5 mg daily) Folic acid tablets (0.5 mg daily) Hemorrhage 6
Bi [22] 2017 45 45 RCT LMWH sodium (twice daily) + PT PT Postpartum VT 4
Burrows et al. [23] 2001 39 37 RCT Dalteparin (2,500 IU, once daily) Normal sodium Postpartum VT; hemorrhage 6
Gates et al. [24] 2004 78 79 RCT Enoxaparin (40 mg, once daily) Placebo (1 ml, once daily) Perinatal VT; hemorrhage 7
Huang [20] 2018 31 31 RCT LMWH sodium (200 U/kg, once daily) + PT PT Perinatal VT 4
Li et al. [25] 2018 51 51 RCT Enoxaparin (40 mg, once daily) + obstetrical care Obstetrical care Postpartum VT 3
Lin et al. [26] 2021 58 58 RCT LMWH sodium (5000 U/kg, once daily) Conventional therapy Postpartum VT 4
Liu [27] 2020 32 32 RCT LMWH sodium (4250 U/kg, twice daily) + PT PT Postpartum VT 3
Pettilä et al. [28] 1999 50 50 RCT Dalteparin once daily (mean 4631 IU/day) Unfractionated heparin twice daily (20569 IU/day) Perinatal VT; hemorrhage 5
Rodger et al. [19] 2014 146 143 RCT Dalteparin: 5000 IU once daily + obstetrical care Obstetrical care Perinatal VT; hemorrhage 6
Zhang [29] 2013 58 58 RCT LMWH sodium (5000 U/kg, twice daily) Conventional therapy Postpartum VT 4
Open in a new tab

Note: LMWH: low molecular weight heparin; RCT: randomized controlled trial; PT: physical therapy; VT: venous thrombosis.

3.2. LMWH and the Incidence of Perinatal VT

10 studies involved the efficacy of LMWH in preventing perinatal VT. There was no heterogeneity among the literature (chi2 = 4.93, P = 0.77, I2 = 0%), and the fixed-effect model was used. The incidence of perinatal VT in the LMWH group was lower than that in the control group (OR = 0.16, 95% CI (0.08, 0.32), Z = 5.19, P < 0.00001), as shown in Figure 2. The funnel chart showed that the scatter points were distributed within the confidence interval, which was roughly symmetrical, and there was no publication bias, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Forest map: comparison of perinatal VT incidence between the LMWH group and control group. LMWH: low molecular weight; VT: venous thrombus embolism.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Funnel chart: comparison of perinatal VT incidence between the LMWH group and control group. OR: odds ratio.

3.3. LMWH and the Incidence of Postpartum VT

A total of 7 studies involved the efficacy of LMWH in preventing postpartum VT. There was no heterogeneity among the literature (chi2 = 3.92, P = 0.69, I2 = 0%), and the fixed-effect model was used. The incidence of postpartum VT in the LMWH group was lower than that in the control group (OR = 0.14, 95% CI (0.07, 0.30), Z = 5.11, P < 0.00001), as shown in Figure 4. The funnel chart shows that the scatter points were distributed within the confidence interval, which was roughly symmetrical, and there was no publication bias, as shown in Figure 5.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Forest map: comparison of the incidence of postpartum VT between the LMWH group and control group. LMWH: low molecular weight; VT: venous thrombus embolism.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Funnel chart: comparison of the incidence of postpartum VT between the LMWH group and control group. OR: odds ratio.

3.4. LMWH and the Incidence of Perinatal Hemorrhage

A total of 5 studies involved the effect of LMWH on the incidence of perinatal hemorrhage. There was no heterogeneity among the literature (chi2 = 5.40, P = 0.25, I2 = 26%), and the fixed-effect model was used. The incidence of perinatal hemorrhage in the LMWH group was higher than that in the control group (OR = 1.72, 95% CI (1.06, 2.77), Z = 2.21, P = 0.03), as shown in Figure 6. The funnel chart showed that the scatter points were distributed within the confidence interval, which was roughly symmetrical, and there was no publication bias, as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

Forest map: comparison of perinatal bleeding rate between the LMWH group and control group. LMWH: low molecular weight; VT: venous thrombus embolism.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

Funnel chart: comparison of perinatal bleeding rate between the LMWH group and control group. OR: odds ratio.

4. Discussion

Rodger et al. [19] showed that the use of LMWH failed to reduce the incidence of venous thrombosis and abortion. There was no difference in the incidence of major bleeding events between the LMWH group and the control group, but minor bleeding events were more common in the LMWH group. Badawy et al. [21] have shown that LMWH can reduce the incidence of early abortion and late abortion. There was no significant difference between the LMWH group and control group in pregnancy mode, amount of bleeding during production, and incidence of placental abruption. Their study also pointed out that the average weight of newborns in the LMWH group was higher than that in the control group. They showed that continuous use of LMWH during pregnancy is safe and can reduce the incidence of spontaneous abortion. Burrows et al. [23] conducted a multicenter prospective trial in a pilot study. In this study, patients in the control group were more likely to receive general anesthesia. In addition, the baseline data were balanced. Their results showed that the efficacy of LMWH and the control group in preventing the incidence of VT after a cesarean section was similar. They also pointed out that multicenter RCTs were feasible. Gates et al. [24] showed no difference in the incidence of thromboembolic events and bleeding events between the two groups. Pettilä et al. [28] showed no VT event in the control and LMWH groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of other complications, including osteoporotic fractures, massive bleeding, blood transfusion, spontaneous abortion, and cesarean section. The incidence of minor bleeding events in the LMWH group was lower than in the control group. Pettilä et al. displayed that LMWH has good safety and can be used for VT event prevention. Zhang [29] showed that the possibility of bleeding caused by low molecular weight heparins is lower than that of unfractionated heparin, and the anticoagulation effect is better. LMWH is easy to use, with high bioavailability and fewer adverse reactions. Their results showed that routine subcutaneous injection of low molecular weight heparin sodium after cesarean section in high-risk pregnant women with VT could effectively prevent the occurrence of venous thrombosis in lower limbs. Huang [20] considered that the incidence of deep venous thrombosis of lower limbs in the LMWH group was 3.23%, and that in the control group was 22.58%. There was a significant difference between the two groups. There was no significant difference in platelet count, prothrombin time, and activated partial thrombin time between the LMWH group and control group. The fibrinogen level in the LMWH group was lower than that in the control group. LMWH could effectively prevent VT events in high-risk pregnant women after cesarean section and shorten the rehabilitation time. Bi [22] showed that the incidence of lower limb VT was 17.18% in the control group and 2.22% in the LMWH group. LMWH has a very superior preventive effect on lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in high-risk pregnant women after cesarean section. Liu [27] conducted RCTs to explore the preventive effect of LMWH combined with physical therapy on thrombotic diseases in high-risk pregnant women after cesarean section. The incidence of lower limb VT in the experimental group was lower than that in the control group. The fibrinogen level in the experimental group was lower than that in the control group. Li et al. [25] showed no VT event in the LMWH group. In comparison, 11 patients (21.57%) had deep venous thrombosis in the control group. Therefore, LMWH reduces VT risk. 6 days after cesarean section, the levels of D-dimer and fibrinogen in the LMWH group were significantly lower than those in the control group. They indicated that LMWH has the advantages of no drug monitoring, a long half-life, and no adverse reactions such as bleeding, easy absorption, and moderate price and can effectively prevent the occurrence of deep venous thrombosis after cesarean section. Lin et al. [26] showed that LMWH can improve blood coagulation and hemorheology of high-risk pregnant women after cesarean section, reduce lower limb pain and swelling, restore skin color, and reduce the incidence of lower limb deep venous thrombosis without noticeable adverse reactions.

As can be seen from the above review, the results of our included studies are not completely consistent. In our analysis, there may be some reasons as follows. Firstly, the sample size of the single study is small, which may lead to sample selection bias. Secondly, differences in dose and regimen may influence the results. Finally, the level of local care may influence the perinatal complication rate. We resolved these controversies through meta-analysis. Our meta-analysis showed that LMWH could reduce the incidence of perinatal and postpartum VT and increase the incidence of perinatal hemorrhage in women at high risk of VT.

In addition to preventing VT, some meta-analyses confirmed the efficacy of LMWH in other perinatal diseases. Jiang et al. [30] figured out that LMWH can effectively treat unexplained recurrent abortion. Sirico et al. [31] showed that LMWH does not increase the risk of bleeding and the incidence of blood transfusion during pregnancy. The result was not consistent with ours. This study did not select pregnant women at high risk of VT, but all pregnant women, as subject. Cohort study, case control study, and randomized controlled study were included in this study. This may result in low credibility of the conclusions. Roberge et al. [32] displayed that the combination of LMWH and aspirin can significantly reduce the incidence of preeclampsia and preterm birth.

In conclusion, LMWH can reduce the incidence of perinatal VT in women with high-risk VT but increase the risk of bleeding. When using LMWH to prevent perinatal VT, maternal should be closely monitored.

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by the Hainan Province Clinical Medical Center.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Authors' Contributions

Yan Huang and Fei Li contributed equally to this work.

References

  • 1.Devis P., Knuttinen M. G. Deep venous thrombosis in pregnancy: incidence, pathogenesis and endovascular management. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther . 2017;7(Suppl 3):S309–S319. doi: 10.21037/cdt.2017.10.08. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Paz T., Bloom A., Roth B., et al. Pharmacomechanical catheter thrombolysis for pregnancy-related proximal deep venous thrombosis: prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine . 2021;34(9):1441–1447. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1638900. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kesteven P., Hanley J., Loughney A. D. Pregnancy-associated venous thrombosis. Phlebology . 2012;27(Suppl 2):73–80. doi: 10.1258/phleb.2012.012s39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hach-Wunderle V., Präve F., Düx M., Hoffmann A., Zegelman M., Hach W. Diagnostik und Therapie der Venenthrombose in der Schwangerschaft. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift . 2008;133(11):521–526. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1046744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Greer I. A. Pregnancy complicated by venous thrombosis. The New England Journal of Medicine . 2015;373(6):540–547. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp1407434. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.McLintock C., Brighton T., Chunilal S., et al. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in pregnancy and the postpartum period. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology . 2012;52(1):14–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2011.01361.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Zhang Y., Cui J., Zhang G., et al. Inflammasome activation promotes venous thrombosis through pyroptosis. Blood Advances . 2021;5(12):2619–2623. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020003041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Olaf M., Cooney R. Deep venous thrombosis. Emergency Medicine Clinics of North America . 2017;35(4):743–770. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2017.06.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Wolberg A. S., Rosendaal F. R., Weitz J. I., et al. Venous thrombosis. Nature Reviews. Disease Primers . 2015;1(1):p. 15006. doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2015.6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Dahm A. E., Bezemer I. D., Bergrem A., et al. Candidate gene polymorphisms and the risk for pregnancy-related venous thrombosis. British Journal of Haematology . 2012;157(6):753–761. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2012.09121.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Dahm A. E., Tiscia G., Holmgren A., et al. Genetic variations in the annexin A5 gene and the risk of pregnancy-related venous thrombosis. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis . 2015;13(3):409–413. doi: 10.1111/jth.12817. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ben-Joseph R., Levy A., Wiznitzer A., Holcberg G., Mazor M., Sheiner E. Pregnancy outcome of patients following deep venous thrombosis. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine . 2009;22(4):332–336. doi: 10.1080/14767050802566652. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Kittisupamongkol W. Low-molecular-weight heparin in pregnancy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology . 2009;201(3, article e12) doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.016. e12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Zhu L., Li M., Liu Y. Intravenous administration of low-molecular-weight heparin. American Journal of Therapeutics . 2019;26(3):e426–e428. doi: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000000841. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gaitanidis A., Breen K. A., Christensen M. A., et al. Low-molecular weight heparin is superior to unfractionated heparin for elderly trauma patients. The Journal of Surgical Research . 2021;268:432–439. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.06.074. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Greer I. A. Low-molecular-weight heparin for pregnancy complications. Lancet . 2016;388(10060):2570–2572. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31328-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Nakae K., Ueno K., Moriyama M., Baba Y., Kawano Y. Low-molecular-weight heparin for asymptomatic cerebral sinovenous thrombosis in a neonate. Pediatrics International . 2021;63(11):1388–1390. doi: 10.1111/ped.14627. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Gray E., Mulloy B., Barrowcliffe T. W. Heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin. Thrombosis and Haemostasis . 2008;99(5):807–818. doi: 10.1160/TH08-01-0032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rodger M. A., Hague W. M., Kingdom J., et al. Antepartum dalteparin versus no antepartum dalteparin for the prevention of pregnancy complications in pregnant women with thrombophilia (TIPPS): a multinational open-label randomised trial. Lancet . 2014;384(9955):1673–1683. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60793-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Huang L. F. Effect of low molecular weight heparin sodium on prevention of lower limb deep venous thrombosis after cesarean section in high-risk pregnant women. Journal of clinical rational drug use . 2018;11(16):90–91. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Badawy A. M., Khiary M., Sherif L. S., Hassan M., Ragab A., Abdelall I. Low-molecular weight heparin in patients with recurrent early miscarriages of unknown aetiology. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology . 2008;28(3):280–284. doi: 10.1080/01443610802042688. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bi L. C. Effect of low molecular weight heparin sodium on prevention for lower limb deep venous thrombosis after cesarean section in high-risk pregnant women. Chinese Journal of Woman and Child Health Research . 2017;28(S2):490–491. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Burrows R. F., Gan E. T., Gallus A. S., Wallace E. M., Burrows E. A. A randomised double-blind placebo controlled trial of low molecular weight heparin as prophylaxis in preventing venous thrombolic events after caesarean section: a pilot study. BJOG . 2001;108(8):835–839. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2001.00198.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Gates S., Brocklehurst P., Ayers S., Bowler U. Thromboprophylaxis and pregnancy: two randomized controlled pilot trials that used low-molecular-weight heparin. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology . 2004;191(4):1296–1303. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Li Q., Jia X., Tai H., Chen Q., Tang H. Clinical value of enoxaparin sodium in preventing deep venous thrombosis after cesarean section. CHINA MODERN MEDICINE . 2018;25(19):116–118. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Lin S. F., Ni M. L. Preventive effect of LMWH-NA on lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in high-risk pregnant women after cesarean section. China Medicine and Pharmacy . 2021;11(18):88–91. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Liu Q. J. Effect of LMWHs combined with physical therapy on prevention for postpartum thrombotic disease in high-risk pregnant women. Clinical Research . 2020;28(4):58–59. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Pettilä V., Kaaja R., Leinonen P., Ekblad U., Kataja M., Ikkala E. Thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (dalteparin) in pregnancy. Thrombosis Research . 1999;96(4):275–282. doi: 10.1016/S0049-3848(99)00110-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Zhang J. F. Low molecular weight heparin sodium for prevention of lower limb deep venous thrombosis after cesarean section in high-risk pregnant women. Hebei Medical Journal . 2013;35(21):3285–3286. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Jiang F., Hu X., Jiang K., Pi H., He Q., Chen X. The role of low molecular weight heparin on recurrent pregnancy loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology . 2021;60(1):1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2020.11.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Sirico A., Saccone G., Maruotti G. M., et al. Low molecular weight heparin use during pregnancy and risk of postpartum hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine . 2019;32(11):1893–1900. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1419179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Roberge S., Demers S., Nicolaides K. H., Bureau M., Côté S., Bujold E. Prevention of pre-eclampsia by low-molecular-weight heparin in addition to aspirin: a meta-analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology . 2016;47(5):548–553. doi: 10.1002/uog.15789. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Articles from Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES