Pregnancy-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of maternal mortality, but is relatively uncommon. It is clear that the antepartum and postpartum periods have different magnitudes of risk and distinct risk factors for VTE and therefore must be considered separately. Absolute daily risks of VTE must be understood and explored when deciding to prescribe antepartum or postpartum thromboprophylaxis and must also be balanced against the downsides of prophylaxis. When the risks for VTE and bleeding are both low, other burdens of thromboprophylaxis must be weighed in and a decision made after an individualized patient values- and patient preferences–based discussion. Risk stratification is essential to ensure that the practicing clinician strikes the right balance.

Learning Objective
  • To prescribe and recommend thromboprophylaxis rationally in pregnancy and the postpartum period

Symptomatic pregnancy associated venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is estimated to occur antepartum (from conception to delivery, ie, ∼40 weeks) in 5-12 per 10 000 pregnancies and to occur postpartum (6 weeks) in 3-7 per 10 000 deliveries.1  VTE remains a leading cause of direct maternal death in the developed world, causing 0.8-4.7 VTE deaths per 100 000 maternities.2,3  In the period between 2006 and 2009, there were 644 maternal deaths due to PE in the United States (http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/MaternalInfantHealth/PMSS.html#n8).

We recently completed the Thrombophilia in Pregnancy Prophylaxis Study (“TIPPS”), which offered some new insights on preventing VTE in pregnancy.4  In this chapter, we review an evidence-based and absolute risk–based approach to preventing VTE in pregnancy.

The pathophysiology of VTE in the antepartum period includes the following. First, venous stasis caused by progesterone-induced venodilation, pelvic venous compression by the gravid uterus, and pulsatile compression of the left iliac vein by the right iliac artery,5  leading to the marked propensity for left leg DVT in pregnancy (>80%).6  Second is hypercoagulability developing as the hemostatic system is progressively activated to prepare the pregnant women for the hemostatic challenges of delivery (including reduced anticoagulant activity of protein S, increased activated protein C resistance,7  and increased procoagulant activity through higher levels of fibrinogen and factor V, VIII, IX, and X), leading to increased thrombin production7  as measured by increased thrombin antithrombin complexes, increased soluble fibrin, and F 1.2 levels.8  Finally, there is reduced fibrinolysis due to increased plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 and 2 (PAI-1 and 2) activity and decreased tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) activity.8  The pathophysiology of VTE in the postpartum period includes vascular damage to the pelvic vessels that can occur after normal vaginal, assisted vaginal, or cesarean section deliveries and postpartum immobilization. The hypercoagulability of pregnancy, although maximally present in the early postpartum period, gradually returns to the nonpregnant state, as evidenced by progressive normalization of markers of coagulation activation to prepregnancy levels.9,10 

Rational prevention requires optimal balancing of an increased bleeding risk from pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis and reducing VTE, which, although serious and at times tragic, is relatively uncommon. Therefore, we must focus on known high-risk groups with the understanding that recommendations for prophylaxis, even in high-risk groups, are based on limited data. A recently updated Cochrane Review addressed the effectiveness and safety of prophylaxis for VTE in pregnancy and the early postpartum period. The reviewers conclude that: “There is insufficient evidence available from the randomized controlled trials included in this review to guide clinical decision making. In the absence of clear randomized controlled trial evidence practitioners must rely on consensus-derived clinical practice guidelines or recommendations.”11 

The absolute risk of VTE during the time interval of interest (eg, antepartum or postpartum) is a key fact that should underpin decisions about choice, cost, intensity, and duration of VTE prevention. At the extremes, the risk of postpartum VTE in women with prior unprovoked VTE and thrombophilia without thromboprophylaxis exceeds 5% during the short postpartum period,12  whereas the risk of antepartum VTE in unselected pregnant women is <0.1% over 40 weeks of pregnancy.1  With these absolute event rates, even assuming an optimistic 95% relative risk reduction with thromboprophylaxis, we can calculate a number needed to treat (NNT) of ∼20 and ∼1000 for each scenario, respectively; that is, we would need to treat 20 women with prior unprovoked VTE and thrombophilia for the short postpartum interval to prevent one postpartum VTE. Conversely, we would need to treat >1000 average-risk women for the entire antepartum period to prevent one VTE. Clearly, patients, clinicians, and policy makers would find an NNT of 20 for the short postpartum period reasonable, but none would consider an NNT of 1000 reasonable for the 40 week antenatal period. Therefore, the goal is to identify the group of women in whom the intervention is clinically effective, cost-effective, and a reasonable NNT is achieved.

First let us consider nonpharmacologic approaches. Nonpharmacologic tools to prevent VTE have the attraction of not causing major bleeding. It would be tempting to recommend their universal adoption on this basis alone. Certainly, early ambulation postpartum is without risk, likely effective, and should be universally adopted. However, compression stockings, previously assumed to similarly be beneficial and benign, have become controversial. Recent large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in stroke patients suggest that knee-high compression stockings cause DVT and thigh high stockings provide no benefit.13,14  Intermittent pneumatic compression devices have not been studied in pregnancy, but are effective in other populations; however, they are costly and cumbersome for patients.15 

In terms of pharmacologic approaches, low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are the preferred agent. There are no clinical data with the new oral anticoagulants in pregnant or lactating women,16,17  and preliminary data from animal studies suggest that these agents cross the placenta and be secreted into breast milk; therefore, they contraindicated in pregnant and lactating women.17  Warfarin is teratogenic with antepartum use and, although safe to use in breastfeeding mothers, requires frequent laboratory monitoring, which is a challenge in mothers with newborn children. This inconvenience makes warfarin use impractical as thromboprophylaxis in short-term indications.18  Unfractionated heparin must be administered subcutaneously 2-3 times per day and is associated with a 10-fold higher risk of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia than LMWH.19  Furthermore, unfractionated heparin increases the risk of osteoporotic fracture with long-term use, with absolute event rates as high as 2.2%,20  compared with no change in bone mineral density with prophylactic-dose long-term LMWH.21  For these reasons, this discussion on pharmacoprophylaxis will focus on LMWH. Prophylactic doses of LMWH include enoxaparin 40 mg, dalteparin 5000 units, or tinzaparin 4500 units, all given subcutaneously daily. Note that it remains controversial whether LMWH should be weight adjusted or doubled after 20 weeks, when increases in plasma volume and glomerular filtration rate may lead to a reduced anti-Xa effect. Whether these lower anti-Xa levels lead to a reduced efficacy is unknown.

To be clinically effective, the NNT should be low and clearly exceed the number needed to harm (NNH). The major harm associated with LMWH use is major bleeding. In Table 1, I have summarized and provide a pooled proportion of major bleeds in LMWH versus no LMWH RCTs in pregnancy. In the antepartum period, the risk of major bleeding with prophylactic LMWH is very low [0%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0%–0.6%; Table 1]. In other words, in a worst-case scenario, the NNH for major bleeding is 167. However, we must interpret this information with caution because some reports do not include placental abruption or bleeding associated with miscarriage as being LMWH related, but in reality, they may be exacerbated by LMWH.22,23  Not surprisingly, the risk of major bleeding is likely higher in the postpartum period: 0.3% (95% CI: 0%–1%; Table 1). Therefore, the NNH in the postpartum period is likely 333 and, in a worst-case scenario, 100. In addition, we must consider the other downsides of LMWH. This is especially important when the NNH is low and the NNT is high. NNH is low and NNT is high in many antepartum prophylaxis scenarios. Among the other downsides of LMWH is the increased risk of minor bleeding,24,24-26  which, although not life threatening, is at the very least a nuisance and can be anxiety provoking. LMWH use also increases liver enzymes (of unknown clinical significance),24,24  causes heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (albeit rare),27  wound complications after cesarean delivery, allergic reactions (skin reactions 1.8%; anaphylaxis is rare), and antepartum LMWH use until term complicates obstetric analgesic options at delivery. Finally, the cost and inconvenience of LMWH use, especially through the prolonged antepartum period (up to 400 injections per pregnancy at >$15 000 US), should not be minimized.

Table 1.

Pooled proportions of major bleeding in antepartum and postpartum periods in RCTs exploring prophylactic LMWH versus control

Pooled proportions of major bleeding in antepartum and postpartum periods in RCTs exploring prophylactic LMWH versus control
Pooled proportions of major bleeding in antepartum and postpartum periods in RCTs exploring prophylactic LMWH versus control

International Society on Thrombosis & Haemostasis definition of major bleeding was used to define major bleed. Data clarifications obtained from corresponding authors. Peridelivery (from onset of labor to 24 hours postpartum) major bleeds are excluded from antepartum and postpartum periods.

To estimate the net clinical benefit, we must also take into consideration the different case fatality rates (CFRs) of VTE and major bleeding in addition to NNT and NNH. These CFRs are unknown in pregnancy due to the rarity of fatal events and the lack of pregnancy-specific VTE and LMWH studies. However, in other populations, the CFR of major VTEs, the proportion of major VTEs that are fatal, has been determined to be 1.4% (95% CI: 0.9%–2.2%).28  In contrast, the CFR of major bleeding associated with prophylactic anticoagulants is estimated to be 3.6% (95% CI: 3.2%–3.9%).28  This suggests that any incremental major bleeding risk estimate must be inflated 2- to 3-fold to counterbalance a reduction in major VTE if a pharmacologic prophylaxis strategy is to be expected to achieve a mortality benefit. Taking the CFRs into account, patients would require a postpartum VTE risk of >1% for LMWH prophylaxis to likely provide a net clinical benefit in the postpartum period (recall point estimate of major bleeding with postpartum LMWH use of 0.3% and above) and >3% to almost certainly provide benefit (recall upper bound of 95% CI for postpartum major bleed of 1%). Similarly, in the antepartum period, in a worst-case scenario, we would require an absolute antenatal VTE risk of >1.8% to likely provide a net clinical benefit (recall upper bound of 95% CI of 0.6% for antenatal LMWH use) and almost certainly provide a net clinical benefit if the antenatal VTE risk were >3%. Taking into consideration all of the other downsides of prolonged antenatal LMWH use, most clinicians and patients would not likely consider antenatal LMWH if the antenatal risk of VTE were <1%. Each scenario requires an individual patient discussion, taking into account patient preferences and values, to come to a common decision on prophylaxis. For example, some patients with needle phobia may be more comfortable with a higher VTE risk thresholds before instituting prophylaxis and some patients with a family history of life-threatening PE in a first-degree relative may be more comfortable with a lower VTE risk threshold to accept prophylaxis.

As outlined above, most clinicians/patients would seek an absolute risk of antenatal VTE that exceeds 1% before even considering antepartum LMWH prophylaxis. In Tables 2 and 3, I have summarized the studies exploring the risk of pregnancy-associated VTE in women with prior VTE and provide pooled proportions of risk of recurrent VTE. Given an absolute risk of antenatal VTE of 0.1% in the general pregnant population, we need to identify risk factors that increase the risk of antenatal VTE by >10-fold before even considering antepartum LMWH prophylaxis. The risk factors for antepartum VTE that appear to increase the risk of antenatal VTE >10-fold or are associated with >1% absolute risk of VTE include: prior VTE if unprovoked or if associated with a prior estrogen hormone exposure (exogenous estrogen or pregnancy; Tables 2 and 3); immobilization (strict bed rest for a week or more in the antepartum period and BMI ≥25 kg/m2; odds ratio = 62.3; 95% CI: 11.5-337)29 ; and women with potent thrombophilias such as homozygous factor V Leiden (FVL)30,31  or homozygous prothrombin gene variant (PGV),31  antithrombin deficiency,32  and those who are double heterozygotes for thrombophilia.31 . It should be noted that published data on VTE risk in otherwise asymptomatic pregnant women with antithrombin deficiency are limited to small case series, but most of the literature supports a high enough risk to warrant thromboprophylaxis.33 

Table 2.

Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum and postpartum periods in patients with prior VTE (provoked or unprovoked or estrogen associated) on prophylactic anticoagulants versus control

Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum and postpartum periods in patients with prior VTE (provoked or unprovoked or estrogen associated) on prophylactic anticoagulants versus control
Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum and postpartum periods in patients with prior VTE (provoked or unprovoked or estrogen associated) on prophylactic anticoagulants versus control

Major VTE indicates proximal DVT and PE.

*Denominator is pregnant women.

†Denominator is pregnancies.

Table 3.

Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum periods without anticoagulant prophylaxis in patient subgroups with prior unprovoked VTE, prior provoked VTE, and prior estrogen-associated VTE

Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum periods without anticoagulant prophylaxis in patient subgroups with prior unprovoked VTE, prior provoked VTE, and prior estrogen-associated VTE
Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum periods without anticoagulant prophylaxis in patient subgroups with prior unprovoked VTE, prior provoked VTE, and prior estrogen-associated VTE

Major VTE indicates proximal DVT and PE. Estrogen-associated indicates exogenous estrogen- and pregnancy-associated VTE with or without other risk factors.

*Denominator is pregnant women.

†Denominator is pregnancies.

It is noteworthy that the risk of antenatal VTE in women with prior provoked VTE (surgery, trauma, or immobilization) without thrombophilia and without an estrogen hormone trigger for their VTE (exogenous estrogen or pregnancy) is low, so it is likely that this subgroup can have prophylaxis withheld in the antenatal period.34  It is also likely that this recommendation can be extended to all women with prior provoked VTE that are not estrogen associated (Table 3) regardless of thrombophilia, but uncertainty remains because the high upper bound of the 95% confidence interval around the pooled estimate is higher than 3% (Table 3).

Women without prior VTE with weak thrombophilias (eg, heterozygous FVL or heterozygous PGV) have a low antepartum risk of VTE and should not receive anticoagulant prophylaxis. Large prospective cohort studies of patients with FVL and PGV35-38  and RCTs (Table 4) demonstrate a low antenatal VTE risk with these common thrombophilias without antenatal prophylaxis.

Table 4.

Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum and postpartum periods in thrombophilic patients without prior VTE on prophylactic LMWH versus control with or without ASA in pregnancy

Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum and postpartum periods in thrombophilic patients without prior VTE on prophylactic LMWH versus control with or without ASA in pregnancy
Pooled proportion of major VTE in antepartum and postpartum periods in thrombophilic patients without prior VTE on prophylactic LMWH versus control with or without ASA in pregnancy

Major VTE indicates proximal DVT and PE. Note that the majority of the thrombophilic patients in the component studies had weak thrombophilia (eg, FVL and PGV).

Compared with age-matched, nonpregnant controls, the daily risk of VTE is increased 7- to 10-fold for antepartum VTE, but is 15- to 35-fold for postpartum VTE.39,40  The heightened clinical risk of VTE after delivery rapidly diminishes during the postpartum period,39  returning to the antenatal level of risk by 3 weeks postpartum and then to nonpregnant levels after the 6th to 12th postpartum week.29,41,42 

We seek an absolute risk of postnatal VTE that exceeds 1% to consider postpartum LMWH prophylaxis and to definitely suggest postpartum LMWH prophylaxis if the risk exceeds 3%. Therefore, given an absolute risk of postpartum VTE of 0.05% in unselected populations, we need to identify risk factors that increase the risk of postnatal VTE by >20-fold before considering postpartum LMWH prophylaxis and a >60-fold increased risk would definitely suggest LMWH prophylaxis is indicated. The risk factors for postpartum VTE that increase risk >20-fold or are associated with a >1% absolute risk of VTE are: immobilization (strict bed rest for a week or more in the antepartum period and BMI ≥25 kg/m2; odds ratio = 40.1; 95% CI: 8.0-201.5),29  homozygous FVL,43  and homozygous PGV.43  The risk factors that increase risk of VTE >60-fold or are associated with an absolute risk of VTE >3% are antithrombin deficiency,44  combined thrombophilias, and prior VTE (all prior VTEs regardless of whether unprovoked, provoked, or estrogen associated; Table 2). Finally, although not well explored, perhaps other combinations of independent risk factors would exceed these thresholds. These other risk factors might include family history of VTE,45  prior superficial phlebitis,46  weaker thrombophilias (heterozygous FVL or heterozygous PGV or protein C deficiency or protein S deficiency), emergency C-section, postpartum infection, postpartum hemorrhage, smoking, BMI >25 kg/m2, intrauterine growth restriction, preeclampsia, stillbirth, varicose veins, inflammatory bowel disease, preterm birth, and age >35 years.29,47  Further research is required to identify which of these latter combinations of risk factor subgroups is high enough risk to warrant postpartum thromboprophylaxis.

It is notable that the risk of postpartum VTE in women with heterozygous FVL or heterozygous PGV without a personal history of VTE or a family history of VTE is likely lower than 1%, so it is very debatable if these women should receive postpartum prophylaxis in the absence of other risk factors.18 

At the other extreme, the high risk of postpartum VTE in patients with prior VTE despite prophylaxis is striking in some studies (>5%12,48 ) and the pooled estimate of 1.7% (Table 2) suggests a need for research to explore alternative strategies that, again, will need to be balanced against a higher bleeding risk. Indeed, the Highlow RCT (www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier #NCT01828697) is currently under way exploring and is whether higher doses of LMWH prophylaxis (50%–75% of full treatment dose) are superior to the usual fixed, low-dose prophylaxis. Consensus guidelines also suggest adding mechanical methods to pharmacoprophylaxis in high-risk patients in the postpartum period18  and certainly patients with prior VTE would warrant this added measure.

In addition to the individualized discussion regarding anticoagulant prophylaxis suggested, all women at high risk of pregnancy-associated VTE should also be counseled about the signs and symptoms of DVT and PE and an action plan developed should these symptoms arise. It is important to explain to patients that VTE-mimicking symptoms are common in pregnancy. They should not be alarmed by the gradual development of bilateral leg edema or the gradual onset of dyspnea in late pregnancy.

Women with a prior VTE who remain on vitamin K antagonists should be counseled to discontinue them as soon as they become pregnant (missed menses and/or positive urine pregnancy test). In women on oral direct factor Xa inhibitors or direct thrombin inhibitors, reliable contraceptive methods are advised until a planned pregnancy. Before a planned pregnancy, these drugs should be discontinued and replaced by vitamin K antagonists or LMWH. In women who become pregnant and have had a recent VTE, the urgency and aggressiveness of ongoing treatment should be dictated by the age of the recent VTE. In the absence of pregnancy-specific research to guide us, my approach is to start full-dose therapeutic LMWH immediately if the VTE occurred in the last month (eg, enoxaparin 1 mg/kg q 12 h or dalteparin 200 units/kg q 24 h, or tinzaparin 175 units/kg q 24 h). I offer aggressive prophylaxis in the form of intermediate-dose (eg, 3/4 of full treatment dose) LMWH initiated in the next 24 hours if the VTE occurred in the last 12 months and I consider prophylactic-dose LMWH if the VTE occurred >12 months previously (eg, enoxaparin 40 mg, dalteparin 5000 units, or tinzaparin 4500 all given sc daily).

In summary, as our knowledge of the absolute risks of pharmacoprophylaxis in pregnancy and VTE risk stratification in pregnancy has evolved, we have developed a clearer picture of who should and who should not receive pharmacoprophylaxis to prevent pregnancy-associated VTE (Table 5). Clinicians should arm themselves with this knowledge to strike the right balance in preventing pregnancy-associated VTE.

Table 5.

Recommendations for thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy

Recommendations for thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy
Recommendations for thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy

Weak thrombophilia indicates heterozygous FVL or PGV; potent thrombophilia, antithrombin deficiency, homozygous FVL, homozygous PGV, or combined deficiencies.

*Consider higher doses of prophylactic LMWH and/or adding intermittent pneumatic compression devices.

†Other risk factors indicates that it remains to be validated whether combinations of other risk factors for postpartum VTE including family history of VTE, prior superficial phlebitis, weak thrombophilia, or moderate-risk thrombophilias (asymptomatic anti-phospholipid antibodies, protein C deficiency, protein S deficiency), emergency C-section, postpartum infection, postpartum hemorrhage, smoking, BMI >25 kg/m2, intrauterine growth restriction, preeclampsia, stillbirth, varicose veins, inflammatory bowel disease, preterm birth, and age >35 years) are high enough risk to warrant postpartum prophylaxis.

Conflict-of-interest disclosure: The author declares no competing financial interests. Off-label drug use: LMWH to prevent VTE in pregnancy.

Marc Rodger, Chief, Division of Hematology, Senior Scientist, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 1812-E Box 201, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1H 8L6; Phone: (613)737-8899, ext. 74641; Fax: (613)739-6102; e-mail: [email protected].

1
Simpson
 
EL
Lawrenson
 
RA
Nightingale
 
AL
Farmer
 
RD
Venous thromboembolism in pregnancy and the puerperium: incidence and additional risk factors from a London perinatal database
BJOG
2001
, vol. 
108
 
1
(pg. 
56
-
60
)
2
Berg
 
CJ
Callaghan
 
WM
Syverson
 
C
Henderson
 
Z
Pregnancy-related mortality in the United States, 1998 to 2005
Obstet Gynecol
2010
, vol. 
116
 
6
(pg. 
1302
-
1309
)
3
Cantwell
 
R
Clutton-Brock
 
T
Cooper
 
G
et al. 
Saving Mothers' Lives: Reviewing maternal deaths to make motherhood safer: 2006-2008: the Eighth Report of the Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths in the United Kingdom
BJOG
2011
, vol. 
118
 
Suppl 1
(pg. 
1
-
203
)
4
Rodger
 
MA
Hague
 
WM
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
 
In Press
5
Macklon
 
NS
Greer
 
IA
Bowman
 
AW
An ultrasound study of gestational and postural changes in the deep venous system of the leg in pregnancy
Br J Obstet Gynaecol
1997
, vol. 
104
 
2
(pg. 
191
-
197
)
6
Ray
 
JG
Chan
 
WS
Deep vein thrombosis during pregnancy and the puerperium: a meta-analysis of the period of risk and the leg of presentation
Obstet Gynecol Surv
1999
, vol. 
54
 
4
(pg. 
265
-
271
)
7
Clark
 
P
Brennand
 
J
Conkie
 
JA
et al. 
Activated protein C sensitivity, protein C, protein S and coagulation in normal pregnancy
Thromb Haemost
1998
, vol. 
79
 
6
(pg. 
1166
-
1170
)
8
Rosenkranz
 
A
Hiden
 
M
Leschnik
 
B
et al. 
Calibrated automated thrombin generation in normal uncomplicated pregnancy
Thromb Haemost
2008
, vol. 
99
 
2
(pg. 
331
-
337
)
9
Kjellberg
 
U
Andersson
 
NE
Rosen
 
S
Tengborn
 
L
Hellgren
 
M
APC resistance and other haemostatic variables during pregnancy and puerperium
Thromb Haemost
1999
, vol. 
81
 
4
(pg. 
527
-
531
)
10
Epiney
 
M
Boehlen
 
F
Boulvain
 
M
et al. 
D-dimer levels during delivery and the postpartum
J Thromb Haemost
2005
, vol. 
3
 
2
(pg. 
268
-
271
)
11
Bain
 
E
Wilson
 
A
Tooher
 
R
et al. 
Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolic disease in pregnancy and the early postnatal period
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
2014
, vol. 
2
 pg. 
CD001689
 
12
Pabinger
 
I
Grafenhofer
 
H
Kaider
 
A
et al. 
Risk of pregnancy-associated recurrent venous thromboembolism in women with a history of venous thrombosis
J Thromb Haemost
2005
, vol. 
3
 
5
(pg. 
949
-
954
)
13
CLOTS Trial Collaboration
Thigh-length versus below-knee stockings for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis after stroke: a randomized trial
Ann Intern Med
2010
, vol. 
153
 
9
(pg. 
553
-
562
)
14
Dennis
 
M
Sandercock
 
PA
Reid
 
J
et al. 
Effectiveness of thigh-length graduated compression stockings to reduce the risk of deep vein thrombosis after stroke (CLOTS trial 1): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial
Lancet
2009
, vol. 
373
 
9679
(pg. 
1958
-
1965
)
15
Dennis
 
M
Sandercock
 
P
Reid
 
J
et al. 
Effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression in reduction of risk of deep vein thrombosis in patients who have had a stroke (CLOTS 3): a multicentre randomised controlled trial
Lancet
2013
, vol. 
382
 
9891
(pg. 
516
-
524
)
16
Boehringer Ingelheim Canada
Pradax Product Monograph: Dabigatran Etixilate Capsules
2009
17
Bayer
Xarelto Product Monograph, Rivaroxaban Tablet
2008
18
Bates
 
SM
Greer
 
IA
Middeldorp
 
S
et al. 
VTE, thrombophilia, antithrombotic therapy, and pregnancy: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines
Chest
2012
, vol. 
141
 
2 Suppl
(pg. 
e691S
-
e736S
)
19
Martel
 
N
Lee
 
J
Wells
 
PS
Risk for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparin thromboprophylaxis: a meta-analysis
Blood
2005
, vol. 
106
 
8
(pg. 
2710
-
2715
)
20
Dahlman
 
TC
Osteoporotic fractures and the recurrence of thromboembolism during pregnancy and the puerperium in 184 women undergoing thromboprophylaxis with heparin
Am J Obstet Gynecol
1993
, vol. 
168
 (pg. 
1265
-
1270
)
21
Rodger
 
MA
Kahn
 
SR
Cranney
 
A
et al. 
Long-term dalteparin in pregnancy not associated with a decrease in bone mineral density: substudy of a randomized controlled trial
J Thromb Haemost
2007
, vol. 
5
 (pg. 
1600
-
1606
)
22
Bauersachs
 
R
Dudenhausen
 
J
Faridi
 
A
et al. 
Risk stratification and heparin prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism in pregnant women
Thromb Haemost
2007
, vol. 
98
 
6
(pg. 
1237
-
1245
)
23
Lepercq
 
J
Conard
 
J
Borel-Derlon
 
A
et al. 
Venous thromboembolism during pregnancy: a retrospective study of enoxaparin safety in 624 pregnancies
BJOG
2001
, vol. 
108
 
11
(pg. 
1134
-
1140
)
24
Rodger
 
MA
Hague
 
WM
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
 
In press
25
Kaandorp
 
SP
Goddijn
 
M
van der Post
 
JA
et al. 
Aspirin plus heparin or aspirin alone in women with recurrent miscarriage
N Engl J Med
2010
, vol. 
362
 
17
(pg. 
1586
-
1596
)
26
Clark
 
P
Walker
 
ID
Langhorne
 
P
et al. 
SPIN: the Scottish Pregnancy Intervention Study: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of low molecular weight heparin and low dose aspirin in women with recurrent miscarriage
Blood
2010
, vol. 
115
 
21
(pg. 
4162
-
4167
)
27
Huhle
 
G
Geberth
 
M
Hoffmann
 
U
Heene
 
DL
Harenberg
 
J
Management of heparin-associated thrombocytopenia in pregnancy with subcutaneous r-hirudin
Gynecol Obstet Invest
2000
, vol. 
49
 
1
(pg. 
67
-
69
)
28
Lazo-Langner
 
A
Rodger
 
MA
Barrowman
 
NJ
et al. 
Comparing multiple competing interventions in the absence of randomized trials using clinical risk-benefit analysis
BMC Med Res Methodol
2012
, vol. 
12
 pg. 
3
 
29
Jacobsen
 
AF
Skjeldestad
 
FE
Sandset
 
PM
Ante- and postnatal risk factors of venous thrombosis: a hospital-based case-control study
J Thromb Haemost
2008
, vol. 
6
 (pg. 
905
-
912
)
30
Martinelli
 
I
Legnani
 
C
Bucciarelli
 
P
et al. 
Risk of pregnancy-related venous thrombosis in carriers of severe inherited thrombophilia
Thromb Haemost
2001
, vol. 
86
 
3
(pg. 
800
-
803
)
31
Jacobsen
 
AF
Dahm
 
A
Bergrem
 
A
Jacobsen
 
EM
Sandset
 
PM
Risk of venous thrombosis in pregnancy among carriers of the factor V Leiden and the prothrombin gene G20210A polymorphisms
J Thromb Haemost
2010
, vol. 
8
 
11
(pg. 
2443
-
2449
)
32
Conard
 
J
Horellou
 
MH
Van
 
DP
Lecompte
 
T
Samama
 
M
Thrombosis and pregnancy in congenital deficiencies in AT III, protein C or protein S: study of 78 women
Thromb Haemost
1990
, vol. 
63
 
2
(pg. 
319
-
320
)
33
Bramham
 
K
Retter
 
A
Robinson
 
SE
et al. 
How I treat heterozygous hereditary antithrombin deficiency in pregnancy
Thromb Haemost
2013
, vol. 
110
 
3
(pg. 
550
-
559
)
34
Brill-Edwards
 
P
Ginsberg
 
JS
Gent
 
M
et al. 
Safety of withholding heparin in pregnant women with a history of venous thromboembolism: recurrence of clot in this pregnancy study group
N Engl J Med
2000
, vol. 
343
 
20
(pg. 
1439
-
1444
)
35
Lindqvist
 
PG
Svensson
 
PJ
Marsaal
 
K
et al. 
Activated protein C resistance (FV:Q506) and pregnancy
Thromb Haemost
1999
, vol. 
81
 
4
(pg. 
532
-
537
)
36
Silver
 
RM
Zhao
 
Y
Spong
 
CY
et al. 
Prothrombin gene G20210A mutation and obstetric complications
Obstet Gynecol
2010
, vol. 
115
 
1
(pg. 
14
-
20
)
37
Said
 
JM
Higgins
 
JR
Moses
 
EK
et al. 
Inherited thrombophilia polymorphisms and pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous women
Obstet Gynecol
2010
, vol. 
115
 
1
(pg. 
5
-
13
)
38
Clark
 
P
Sattar
 
N
Walker
 
ID
Greer
 
IA
The Glasgow Outcome, APCR and Lipid (GOAL) Pregnancy Study: significance of pregnancy associated activated protein C resistance
Thromb Haemost
2001
, vol. 
85
 
1
(pg. 
30
-
35
)
39
Heit
 
JA
Kobbervig
 
CE
James
 
AH
et al. 
Trends in the incidence of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy or postpartum: a 30-year population-based study
Ann Intern Med
2005
, vol. 
143
 (pg. 
697
-
706
)
40
Anderson
 
FA
Wheeler
 
HB
Goldberg
 
RJ
et al. 
A population-based perspective of the hospital incidence and case-fatality rates of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: the Worcester study
Arch Intern Med
1991
, vol. 
151
 (pg. 
933
-
938
)
41
Pomp
 
ER
Lenselink
 
AM
Rosendaal
 
FR
Doggen
 
CJ
Pregnancy, the postpartum period and prothrombotic defects: risk of venous thrombosis in the MEGA study
J Thromb Haemost
2008
, vol. 
6
 
4
(pg. 
632
-
637
)
42
Kamel
 
MA
Neulen
 
J
Sayed
 
GH
Salem
 
HT
Breckwoldt
 
M
Heterogeneity of human prolactin levels in serum during the early postpartum period
Gynecol Endocrinol
1993
, vol. 
7
 
3
(pg. 
173
-
177
)
43
Robertson
 
L
Wu
 
O
Langhorne
 
P
et al. 
Thrombophilia in pregnancy: a systematic review
Br J Haematol
2006
, vol. 
132
 (pg. 
171
-
196
)
44
McColl
 
MD
Ramsay
 
JE
Tait
 
RC
et al. 
Risk factors for pregnancy associated venous thromboembolism
Thromb Haemost
1997
, vol. 
78
 
4
(pg. 
1183
-
1188
)
45
Bezemer
 
ID
van der Meer
 
FJ
Eikenboom
 
JC
Rosendaal
 
FR
Doggen
 
CJ
The value of family history as a risk indicator for venous thrombosis
Arch Intern Med
2009
, vol. 
169
 
6
(pg. 
610
-
615
)
46
Danilenko-Dixon
 
DR
Heit
 
JA
Silverstein
 
MD
et al. 
Risk factors for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism during pregnancy or post partum: a population-based, case-control study
Am J Obstet Gynecol
2001
, vol. 
184
 
2
(pg. 
104
-
110
)
47
Sultan
 
AA
Tata
 
LJ
West
 
J
et al. 
Risk factors for first venous thromboembolism around pregnancy: a population-based cohort study from the United Kingdom
Blood
2013
, vol. 
121
 
19
(pg. 
3953
-
3961
)
48
Roeters van Lennep
 
JE
Meijer
 
E
Klumper
 
FJ
et al. 
Prophylaxis with low-dose low-molecular-weight heparin during pregnancy and postpartum: is it effective?
J Thromb Haemost
2011
, vol. 
9
 
3
(pg. 
473
-
480
)
49
de Vries
 
JIP
van Pampus
 
MG
Hague
 
WM
Bezemer
 
PD
Joosten
 
JH
Low-molecular-weight heparin added to aspirin in the prevention of recurrent early-onset pre-eclampsia in women with inheritable thrombophilia: the FRUIT-RCT
J Thromb Haemost
2012
, vol. 
10
 
1
(pg. 
64
-
72
)
50
Gris
 
JC
Chauleur
 
C
Molinari
 
N
et al. 
Addition of enoxaparin to aspirin for the secondary prevention of placental vascular complications in women with severe pre-eclampsia: the pilot randomised controlled NOH-PE trial
Thromb Haemost
2011
, vol. 
106
 
6
(pg. 
1053
-
1061
)
51
Gris
 
JC
Chauleur
 
C
Faillie
 
JL
et al. 
Enoxaparin for the secondary prevention of placental vascular complications in women with abruptio placentae. The pilot randomised controlled NOH-AP trial
Thromb Haemost
2010
, vol. 
104
 
4
(pg. 
771
-
779
)
52
Martinelli
 
I
Ruggenenti
 
P
Cetin
 
I
et al. 
Heparin in pregnant women with previous placenta-mediated pregnancy complications: a prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled clinical trial
Blood
2012
, vol. 
119
 
14
(pg. 
3269
-
3275
)
53
Rey
 
E
Garneau
 
P
David
 
M
et al. 
Dalteparin for the prevention of recurrence of placental-mediated complications of pregnancy in women without thrombophilia: a pilot randomized controlled trial
J Thromb Haemost
2009
, vol. 
7
 
1
(pg. 
58
-
64
)
54
Gates
 
S
Brocklehurst
 
P
Ayers
 
S
Bowler
 
U
Thromboprophylaxis and pregnancy: two randomized controlled pilot trials that used low-molecular-weight heparin
Am J Obstet Gynecol
2004
, vol. 
191
 
4
(pg. 
1296
-
1303
)
55
Burrows
 
RF
Gan
 
ET
Gallus
 
AS
Wallace
 
EM
Burrows
 
EA
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
, vol. 
108
 
8
(pg. 
835
-
839
)
56
Howell
 
R
Fidler
 
J
Letsky
 
E
de Swiet
 
M
The risks of antenatal subcutaneous heparin prophylaxis: a controlled trial
Br J Obstet Gynaecol
1983
, vol. 
90
 
12
(pg. 
1124
-
1128
)
57
Tengborn
 
L
Bergqvist
 
D
Matzsch
 
T
Bergqvist
 
A
Hedner
 
U
Recurrent thromboembolism in pregnancy and puerperium. Is there a need for thromboprophylaxis?
Am J Obstet Gynecol
1989
, vol. 
160
 (pg. 
90
-
94
)
58
De Stefano
 
V
Martinelli
 
I
Rossi
 
E
et al. 
The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism in pregnancy and puerperium without antithrombotic prophylaxis
Br J Haematol
2006
, vol. 
135
 
3
(pg. 
386
-
391
)
59
Lao
 
TT
de
 
SM
Letsky
 
SE
Walters
 
BN
Prophylaxis of thromboembolism in pregnancy: an alternative
Br J Obstet Gynaecol
1985
, vol. 
92
 
3
(pg. 
202
-
206
)
60
Lindqvist
 
PG
Bremme
 
K
Hellgren
 
M
Efficacy of obstetric thromboprophylaxis and long-term risk of recurrence of venous thromboembolism
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
2011
, vol. 
90
 
6
(pg. 
648
-
653
)
61
Gibson
 
JL
Ekevall
 
K
Walker
 
I
Greer
 
IA
Puerperal thromboprophylaxis: comparison of the anti-Xa activity of enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin
Br J Obstet Gynaecol
1998
, vol. 
105
 
7
(pg. 
795
-
797
)