ArticleBlood advances2024
Effectiveness and safety of prophylactic anticoagulation among hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease.
Article in Blood advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-world patient characteristics, treatments, and outcomes during and after severe ulcerative colitis hospitalization.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2026Article
- Predicting Clinical Response to Granulocyte/Monocyte Adsorption Apheresis in Treatment-Resistant Ulcerative Colitis.Gastro hep advances · 2026Article
- Coagulopathy and platelet abnormalities in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2025Review
- Sagittal Sinus Thrombosis and Ischemic Cerebrovascular Accident in a Patient With Ulcerative Colitis: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
abstractHospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic anticoagulation compared with no anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with IBD. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a hospital-based database. We included patients with IBD who had a length of hospital stay ≥2 days between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2019. We excluded patients who had other indications for anticoagulation, users of direct oral anticoagulants, warfarin, therapeutic-intensity heparin, and patients admitted for surgery. We defined exposure to prophylactic anticoagulation using charge codes. The primary effectiveness outcome was VTE. The primary safety outcome was bleeding. We used propensity score matching to reduce potential differences between users and nonusers of anticoagulants and Cox proportional-hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The analysis included 56 194 matched patients with IBD (users of anticoagulants, n = 28 097; nonusers, n = 28 097). In the matched sample, prophylactic use of anticoagulants (vs no use) was associated with a lower rate of VTE (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.94) and with no difference in the rate of bleeding (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87-1.26). In this study of hospitalized patients with IBD, prophylactic use of heparin was associated with a lower rate of VTE without increasing bleeding risk compared with no anticoagulation. Our results suggest potential benefits of prophylactic anticoagulation to reduce the burden of VTE in hospitalized patients with IBD.
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.