Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35849624›Full record

SynthesisPLoS medicine2022

Prevention of venous thromboembolic events in patients with lower leg immobilization after trauma: Systematic review and network meta-analysis with meta-epsidemiological approach.

D Douillet, C Chapelle, E Ollier, P Mismetti, P-M Roy, S Laporte

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Provoked vs minimally provoked vs unprovoked VTE: does it matter?Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2023
    Article
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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

D DouilletEmergency Department, Angers University Hospital, Health Faculty, Angers, France.ORCID 0000-0001-7986-7552
C ChapelleClinical Pharmacology Department, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Etienne, France.
E OllierClinical Pharmacology Department, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Etienne, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6925-2941
P MismettiF-CRIN INNOVTE network, Saint-Etienne, France.
P-M RoyEmergency Department, Angers University Hospital, Health Faculty, Angers, France.
S LaporteF-CRIN INNOVTE network, Saint-Etienne, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6197-8668
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Étienne · FRHôpital Nord · FRInserm · FRInstitut Necker Enfants Malades · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLower limb trauma requiring immobilization is a significant contributor to overall venous thromboembolism (VTE) burden. The clinical effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis for this indication and the optimal agent strategy are still a matter of debate. Our main objective was to assess the efficacy of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis to prevent VTE in patients with isolated temporary lower limb immobilization after trauma. We aimed to estimate and compare the clinical efficacy and the safety of the different thromboprophylactic treatments to determine the best strategy. METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a systematic review and a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) including all available randomized trials comparing a pharmacological thromboprophylactic treatment to placebo or to no treatment in patients with leg immobilization after trauma. We searched Medline, Embase, and Web of Science until July 2021. Only RCT or observational studies with analysis of confounding factors including adult patients requiring temporary immobilization for an isolated lower limb injury treated conservatively or surgically and assessing pharmacological thromboprophylactic agents or placebo or no treatment were eligible for inclusion. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major VTE (proximal deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic VTE, and pulmonary embolism-related death). We extracted data according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for NMA and appraised selected trials with the Cochrane review handbook. Fourteen studies were included (8,198 patients). Compared to the control group, rivaroxaban, fondaparinux, and low molecular weight heparins were associated with a significant risk reduction of major VTE with an odds ratio of 0.02 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.00 to 0.19), 0.22 (95% CrI 0.06 to 0.65), and 0.32 (95% CrI 0.15 to 0.56), respectively. No increase of the major bleeding risk was observed with either treatment. Rivaroxaban has the highest likelihood of being ranked top in terms of efficacy and net clinical benefit. The main limitation is that the network had as many indirect comparisons as direct comparisons.

conclusionsThis NMA confirms the favorable benefit/risk ratio of thromboprophylaxis for patients with leg immobilization after trauma with the highest level of evidence for rivaroxaban.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021257669.

Indexed as

Venous ThromboembolismVenous ThrombosisAdultAnticoagulantsBayes TheoremHumansLegLower ExtremityRivaroxabanAnticoagulantsRivaroxaban

Identifiers

PMID35849624
PMCPMC9342742
OpenAlexW4285729605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.