Analysis 1: HIT outcome (RCTs from category A)
Study or subcategory . | LMWH, n/N . | UFH, n/N . | Weight, % . | OR (random) 95% CI . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leyvraz et al,11 1991 | 0/174 | 2/175 | 46.83 | 0.20 [0.01, 4.17] |
| Warkentin et al,3 1995 | 0/333 | 8/332 | 53.17 | 0.06 [0.00, 1.00] |
| Total (95% CI) | 507 | 507 | 100.00 | 0.10 [0.01, 0.82] |
Study or subcategory . | LMWH, n/N . | UFH, n/N . | Weight, % . | OR (random) 95% CI . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leyvraz et al,11 1991 | 0/174 | 2/175 | 46.83 | 0.20 [0.01, 4.17] |
| Warkentin et al,3 1995 | 0/333 | 8/332 | 53.17 | 0.06 [0.00, 1.00] |
| Total (95% CI) | 507 | 507 | 100.00 | 0.10 [0.01, 0.82] |
Review: JLEE meta (version 01); comparison: 02 UFH versus LMWH; outcome, 01 HIT (RCT only). There were no LMWH events and 10 UFH events. Test for heterogeneity: χ2 = 0.36; df = 1 (P = .55); I2 = 0%. Test for overall effect: Z = 2.14 (P = .03).