Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33043231›Full record

ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2020

Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Stephan Nopp, Florian Moik, Bernd Jilma, Ingrid Pabinger, Cihan Ay

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 270 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
270citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

270 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 498 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

210 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephan NoppClinical Division of Haematology and Haemostaseology Department of Medicine I Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4504-482X
Florian MoikClinical Division of Haematology and Haemostaseology Department of Medicine I Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7738-4119
Bernd JilmaDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5652-7977
Ingrid PabingerClinical Division of Haematology and Haemostaseology Department of Medicine I Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria.
Cihan AyClinical Division of Haematology and Haemostaseology Department of Medicine I Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2607-9717
Medical University of Vienna · ATSechenov University · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is frequently observed in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, reported VTE rates differ substantially. Objectives: We aimed at evaluating available data and estimating the prevalence of VTE in patients with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, World Health Organization COVID-19 database) to identify studies reporting VTE rates in patients with COVID-19. Studies with suspected high risk of bias were excluded from quantitative synthesis. Pooled outcome rates were obtained within a random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed for different settings (intensive care unit [ICU] vs non-ICU hospitalization and screening vs no screening) and the association of d-dimer levels and VTE risk was explored. Results: Eighty-six studies (33,970 patients) were identified and 66 (28,173 patients, mean age: 62.6 years, 60.1% men, 19.4% ICU patients) were included in quantitative analysis. The overall VTE prevalence estimate was 14.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.6-16.9), 40.3% (95% CI, 27.0-54.3) with ultrasound screening and 9.5% (95% CI, 7.5-11.7) without screening. Subgroup analysis revealed high heterogeneity, with a VTE prevalence of 7.9% (95% CI, 5.1-11.2) in non-ICU and 22.7% (95% CI, 18.1-27.6) in ICU patients. Prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in non-ICU and ICU patients was 3.5% (95% CI, 2.2-5.1) and 13.7% (95% CI, 10.0-17.9). Patients developing VTE had higher d-dimer levels (weighted mean difference, 3.26 µg/mL; 95% CI, 2.76-3.77) than non-VTE patients. Conclusion: VTE occurs in 22.7% of patients with COVID-19 in the ICU, but VTE risk is also increased in non-ICU hospitalized patients. Patients developing VTE had higher d-dimer levels. Studies evaluating thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with COVID-19 are needed to improve prevention of VTE.

Indexed as

COVID‐19prevalencepulmonary embolismsevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2venous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID33043231
PMCPMC7537137
OpenAlexW3089167000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.