ReviewInternal and emergency medicine2013
Prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients after the results of recent trials with the new oral anticoagulants.
Review in Internal and emergency medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Has time come for the use of direct oral anticoagulants in the extended prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients? Yes.Internal and emergency medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common potentially life-threatening complication in acutely ill medical patients; over 70 % of the fatal episodes of pulmonary embolism during hospitalization occur in non-surgical patients. In the absence of thromboprophylaxis, the incidence of venographically detected deep vein thrombosis is about 15 % in medical patients. Several trials and meta-analyses have clearly demonstrated the prophylactic role of unfractionated heparin, low molecular weight heparin and fondaparinux. Although over the past few years the knowledge of epidemiology, clinical features and prophylaxis in medical patients has significantly improved, there remain a number of controversial areas that require further investigation. Newer VTE risk assessment models have been proposed to select high risk hospitalized medical patients, but they still require external validation; scarce data are available to stratify patients to identify their individual bleeding risk. The optimal duration of thromboprophylaxis in medical patients is still a matter of debate; currently, extended prophylaxis after discharge is not recommended, but it may be required for subgroup of patients with persistently high VTE risk and a negligible risk of bleeding. Based on the results of recent studies, the new oral anticoagulants appear to have a very limited role, if any. However, a better risk stratification of patients who have a persistently increased risk of VTE is warranted to improve the risk to benefit profile of any anticoagulant drug to be used in this setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.