Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 14, 2026

The WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 28, 2012
Pharmacologic therapy for the management of thrombosis: unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin?
1Clinical Thrombosis Center, Lovelace Sandia Health Systems, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87108, USA.
Heparin and heparin-derived drugs play a major therapeutic role in thrombotic and cardiovascular disorders. Infusion of unfractionated heparin (UFH) followed by warfarin has traditionally been the standard pharmacologic therapy for treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes both deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and for initial therapy of non-ST-elevation (NSTE) acute coronary syndrome (ACS). More recently, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) have been shown to provide at least as good efficacy and safety outcomes as UFH regimens for prevention of these conditions. In addition to good efficacy outcomes with LMWHs compared with UFH, LMWHs have other advantages over UFH, including improved bioavailability, QD administration, more predictable anticoagulant response, lack of the need for monitoring, and suitability for outpatient use, thereby increasing convenience, reducing cost, and improving cost-to-benefit ratios. In carefully screened and managed patients, LMWH offers a cost-effective, convenient, and safe alternative to UFH for thrombosis management. The aim of this article is to summarize efficacy, safety, and pharmacoeconomic considerations when selecting LMWH versus UFH for thrombosis management in VTE and NSTE ACS.
Heparin and heparin-derived drugs play a major therapeutic role in thrombotic and cardiovascular disorders. Infusion of unfractionated heparin (UFH) followed by warfarin has traditionally been the standard pharmacologic therapy for treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes both deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and for initial therapy of non-ST-elevation (NSTE) acute coronary syndrome (ACS). More recently, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) have been shown to provide at least as good efficacy and safety outcomes as UFH regimens for prevention of these conditions. In addition to good efficacy outcomes with LMWHs compared with UFH, LMWHs have other advantages over UFH, including improved bioavailability, QD administration, more predictable anticoagulant response, lack of the need for monitoring, and suitability for outpatient use, thereby increasing convenience, reducing cost, and improving cost-to-benefit ratios. In carefully screened and managed patients, LMWH offers a cost-effective, convenient, and safe alternative to UFH for thrombosis management. The aim of this article is to summarize efficacy, safety, and pharmacoeconomic considerations when selecting LMWH versus UFH for thrombosis management in VTE and NSTE ACS.
Related Concept Videos
Anticoagulant Drugs: Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins
Anticoagulant Drugs: Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants
Warfarin, a prominent vitamin K antagonist family member, exerts its effect by inhibiting the enzyme VKORC1 (vitamin K epoxide reductase complex 1). By hindering this enzyme, warfarin...
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Venous Thrombosis IV: Nursing Management
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care

