ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2020
Anticoagulation in splanchnic and cerebral vein thrombosis: An international vignette-based survey.
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 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Different Anticoagulants in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Guideline
- Prescribing patterns and clinician preferences for direct oral anticoagulant use in unusual site venous thromboembolism: a cross-sectional analysis from the Direct oral anticoagulants in Unusual Site venous Thromboembolism (DUST) study.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Observational
- Evidence-Based Minireview: Should warfarin or a direct oral anticoagulant be used in patients presenting with thrombosis in the splanchnic or cerebral veins?Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2021Review
- Clots in unusual places: lots of stress, limited data, critical decisions.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2021Review
- Direct oral anticoagulants for unusual-site venous thromboembolism.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2021Article
- [Portal vein thrombosis-treatment options].Der Gastroenterologe : Zeitschrift fur Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie · 2021Review
- Anticoagulation in splanchnic and cerebral vein thrombosis: An international vignette-based survey.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2020Article
- [Diagnostic and treatment recommendations from the FACME ad-hoc expert working group on the management of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis associated with COVID-19 vaccination].Neurologia (Barcelona, Spain)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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnticoagulant treatment of splanchnic (SVT) and cerebral vein thrombosis (CVT) can be challenging due to the rarity of these conditions, the concomitantly high thrombotic and bleeding risks, and the available low-quality evidence.
objectivesTo explore the current therapeutic approaches to SVT and CVT, and the rationale behind the anticoagulant treatment choice.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted (October 2018-April 2019) among members of three thrombosis and hemostasis societies. The survey consisted of four vignette cases: (i) SVT secondary to transient risk factor; (ii) cirrhotic SVT with esophageal varices; (iii) CVT secondary to transient risk factor; and (iv) unprovoked CVT with intracranial hemorrhage.
resultsA total of 397 physicians responded to the survey. There was wide variability in anticoagulant treatment options, starting time, and duration. Vitamin K antagonists were the commonest choice across the four vignette cases (44.2%-63.0%). The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were the second commonest choice in low-bleeding-risk scenarios (27.7% in case 1, 22.9% in case 3), while parenteral anticoagulation alone was the second commonest choice in high-bleeding-risk scenarios (39.9% in case 2, 39.8% in case 4). The most frequent reasons for selecting DOACs were oral route of administration (50.6%), lack of need for laboratory monitoring (48.1%), and favorable safety profile of these drugs (43.4%).
conclusionsThe results of our study showed that, despite being off-label, the DOACs were considered for the treatment of unusual-site venous thromboembolism. The wide variability among different physicians reflected the clinical difficulties and raised the need for more collaborative trials on these disorders.
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.