ArticleInternational journal of women's health2026
Safety of Fondaparinux After Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Bleeding-Complicated High-Risk Pregnancies: A PSM Cohort Study.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Therapeutic role of low molecular weight heparin and fat-soluble vitamins in pregnancy-associated prethrombotic conditions.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: High-risk pregnancies (those complicated by antiphospholipid syndrome, rheumatic disease, or adverse obstetric histories) increase the risk of thromboembolic events, for which low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is commonly used. However, LMWH can cause bleeding complications, leading to consideration of alternative anticoagulants. Fondaparinux (FPX), a selective factor Xa inhibitor, has been suggested as an alternative, but its safety and efficacy in pregnancy remain unclear. This study aimed to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes between high-risk pregnant women switched from LMWH to FPX due to bleeding complications and those who continued LMWH. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary hospital from January 2018 to June 2024. Pregnant women on LMWH who developed LMWH-related bleeding were switched to FPX and resumed LMWH once bleeding resolved. The comparison group consisted of women who continued LMWH without complications. After propensity score matching (PSM), maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between the two groups using chi-square tests for categorical variables and rank-sum tests for continuous variables. Results: A total of 159 high‑risk pregnant women were included before propensity score matching (124 in the LMWH group and 35 in the FPX group). After 2:1 matching, 62 patients (40 receiving LMWH and 22 receiving FPX) were analyzed with well‑balanced baseline characteristics between groups. In the matched cohort, rates of miscarriage, gestational age at delivery, live birth, Apgar scores, and neonatal intensive care unit admission were comparable between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Postpartum blood loss within 48 hours was significantly lower in the FPX group (p = 0.016), whereas neonatal birth weight was modestly lower (p = 0.019). Overall, FPX demonstrated a safety profile comparable to LMWH without an increase in adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. Conclusion: The results are suggestive that FPX may be a safe and effective alternative for pregnant women intolerant to LMWH, associated with reduced postpartum hemorrhage and no increase in adverse outcomes. Further validation through multicenter and prospective studies is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.