OBJECTIVES: It is estimated that up to 400,000 persons in Mexico are hospitalized yearly for deep-vein thrombosis (DVT). DVT is the presence of a blood clot (thrombus) in the deep veins of the body. The main objective was to indirectly compare the use of tinzaparin, nadroparin and enoxaparin in terms of safety and efficacy for the treatment of deep-vein thrombosis using a network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: To identify suitable studies for a systematic review of treatment of DVT (submitted for abstract), the following databases were searched: MEDLINE, Pubmed, EMBASE, CENTRAL (all via The Cochrane Library), Imbiomed, HTA, for relevant studies recorded between April 1994 to April 2014. Only randomised controlled trials assessing patients with DVT were included. Studies had to report the proportion of patients having recurrence of DVT (efficacy) and the proportion of patients having major bleeding (safety). Titles and abstracts were screened, data were extracted and risk of bias assessment was undertaken.  . Bayesian NMA was used to compare the different interventions. RESULTS: Four studies, assessing four low molecular weight heparins (LMWH), were judged to be sufficiently comparable for inclusion in the NMA. For the proportion of patients having recurrence of DVT or major bleeding, enoxaparin 1 mg/kg twice daily, tinzaparin 175 IU/kg once daily and nadroparin 100 IU/kg  twice daily had a higher probability of being more effective and safe than unfractioned heparin. None of the LMWHs demonstrated a significant superiority over each other in terms of efficacy and safety; therefore, the group of LMWHs is suitable for a further cost minimization analysis and reference price implementation. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of differences between tinzaparin, nadroparin and enoxaparin for recurrence of DVT and major bleeding. Tinzaparin may be preferred by clinicians because it is always given once daily.