 |
|
A Comparison of Heparin and Bishydroxycoumarin (Dicumarol) as AnticoagulantsResistance to Tissue Thromboplastin
RICHARD WARREN, M.D.;
JOHN S. BELKO, M.S.
AMA Arch Surg. 1957;74(1):50-58.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings. |
|
|
|
I. Introduction
Heparin and bishydroxycoumarin ( Dicumarol) have been available for clinical use as anticoagulants for about 18 years. The choice as to which to use has not always been easy. In instances where anticoagulant effect is immediately needed or in which it is required for a few days (less than four) only, heparin is the choice because of the early appearance and quick disappearance of its effect. If a long-term effect is needed over a matter of weeks, bishydroxycoumarin, or a drug with similar action, is widely used because of the disadvantages of heparin with respect to the necessity of parenteral injection and expense.
The decision as to which drug to employ when the duration of therapy is to be a matter of one or two weeks, a situation which is common in the therapy of thromboembolism, is not so simple. The drug selected has generally been that with which
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]
Author Affiliations
Boston; West Roxbury, Mass.
From Veterans Administration Hospital, West Roxbury, Mass. Clinical Professor of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston; Chief, Surgical Service, Veterans Administration Hospital, West Roxbury, Mass., and Surgeon, Peter Bent Brigham Hospital, Boston (Dr. Warren); Biochemist, Research Laboratory, Veterans Administration Hospital (Mr. Belko).
Footnotes
Submitted for publication July 6, 1956.
Presented at the Fourth Scientific Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Society of Angiology, Chicago, June 9, 1956.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
|
