SynthesisBlood advances2020
Systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis.
Synthesis in Blood advances, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Efficacy of Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse in Staging of Lower Limb Intramuscular Venous Thrombosis: A Single-Center Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2026Article
- What preoperative testing is needed in patients undergoing treatment for unruptured intracranial aneurysms? Optimizing value-based care based on perioperative risk: a cost effectiveness analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- Molecular Mechanism of Notch Signaling and Macrophages in Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Comprehensive Review.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2025Review
- Outcomes of deep venous thrombosis management and associated factors among patients in tertiary hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.Thrombosis journal · 2024Article
- Prognostic value of plasma D-dimer levels in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a retrospective study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Characteristics and Treatment Strategy of Isolated Calf Deep Venous Thrombosis after Fractures: A Review of Recent Literature.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Review
- Non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging technique diagnoses DVT and classifies thrombus.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2022Article
- Incidence and risk factors of preoperative isolated calf deep venous thrombosis following hip fractures.Medicine · 2022Article
- Improving SCD compliance in trauma patients at Kings County Hospital Center: a quality improvement report.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Application of an elevated plasma D-dimer cut-off value improves prognosis prediction of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors at 11 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is diagnosed, prompt evaluation and therapeutic intervention are of paramount importance for improvement in patient-important outcomes. We systematically reviewed patient-important outcomes in patients with suspected DVT, including mortality, incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) and DVT, major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and postthrombotic sequelae. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Medline, Embase for eligible studies, references lists of relevant reviews, registered trials, and relevant conference proceedings. Two investigators screened and abstracted data. Nine studies with 5126 patients were included for lower extremity DVT. Three studies with 500 patients were included for upper extremity DVT. Among patients with lower extremity DVT, 0.85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0% to 2.10%) and 0% developed recurrent DVT and PE, respectively, at 3 months. Among patients with upper extremity DVT, 0.49% (95% CI, 0% to 1.16%) and 1.98% (95% CI, 0.62% to 3.33%) developed recurrent DVT and PE, respectively, at 3 months. No major bleeding events were reported for those anticoagulated, which is lower than in other systematic reviews. For both upper and lower extremity DVT, low pretest probability patients with a negative D-dimer had a comparable incidence of VTE at 3 months (∼1%) as patients with a negative ultrasound (US). At higher pretest probabilities, negative US testing with or without serial US appears to be the safer option. In this review, we summarized the outcomes of patients evaluated by various diagnostic pathways. In most instances, there was significant limitation due to small population size or lack of direct evidence of effects of using a specific pathway. This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42018100502.
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.