ArticleThe Permanente journal2017
Risk of Venous Thromboembolism after a Single Normal Proximal Lower Extremity Venous Ultrasound.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Deep Venous Thrombosis in a Patient with a Moderate Pretest Probability and a Negative D-Dimer Test: A Review of the Diagnostic Algorithms.Journal of blood medicine · 2020Review
- Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThe optimal lower extremity venous ultrasound (US) protocol to diagnose deep venous thrombosis of the popliteal and more proximal veins is unclear.
objectiveTo determine the three-month rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) and clinical outcomes of inpatients and ambulatory patients with normal findings on single venous ultrasound of the popliteal and more proximal veins (single proximal US).
designSingle proximal US results and clinical data of all inpatient and ambulatory patients with suspected acute deep venous thrombosis were retrospectively reviewed during a 12-month period between January and December 2014. Three-month follow-up data were reviewed for all these patients, who received all their care from a single geographically isolated health maintenance organization.
main outcome measuresThree-month rate of symptomatic VTE and clinical outcomes after an initially normal single proximal US result.
resultsOf 1295 patients, 111 (8.6%) were found to have acute deep venous thrombosis on the initial proximal US. Of the remaining 1184 patients with initially normal results on proximal US who were sampled at 3-month follow-up, 1075 patients (90.8%) had no venous thromboembolic event. Among the others, 11 (0.9%) had a subsequent imaging-confirmed venous thromboembolic event, 53 (4.5%) died (none owing to venous thromboembolism), and 45 (3.8%) did not complete follow-up.
conclusionSymptomatic VTE after an initially normal single proximal US result occurred in less than 1% of this cohort. Therefore, serial proximal US is unnecessary for most of our patients, and its elimination will save time and out-of-pocket expenses.
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.