Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Orthopedic Patients Taking Clopidogrel: A Focused Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orthopedic surgeons frequently manage patients taking clopidogrel who require low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for venous thromboprophylaxis. This review examines the differences between arterial and venous thrombosis and explains why both medications are often necessary despite the increased bleeding risk. We conducted a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar from January 2000 to August 2025, screening 1,184 records and ultimately including 57 studies comprising eight randomized controlled trials, 32 cohort studies, and 17 systematic reviews. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Due to substantial heterogeneity in study populations, interventions, and outcome definitions, we conducted structured narrative synthesis rather than meta-analysis. We provide clear guidance on when to stop or continue clopidogrel therapy in elective versus trauma surgery and how to safely combine it with LMWH when needed. Key recommendations include that clopidogrel alone does not prevent venous thromboembolism, LMWH remains necessary in immobilized patients, elective surgery usually requires the temporary cessation of clopidogrel, and trauma surgery should not be delayed despite ongoing therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".