ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2024
Direct oral anticoagulants and venous malformations: literature review and retrospective study of 29 patients.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between perioperative D-dimer dynamics and post-treatment localized intravascular coagulation in venous malformations.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Advances in genetics, signaling, and modeling of venous malformations.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Alcohol embolization versus non-invasive treatment for pain relief in peripheral venous malformations: a comparative study.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2025Article
- The Role of Medical Management in Vascular Anomalies.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2024Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anti-Coagulants in Painful Venous Malformations in Children.Pediatric dermatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Venous malformations (VMs) are commonly associated with localized intravascular coagulopathy leading to elevated D-dimer and risks of hemorrhagic and thromboembolic events, particularly in extensive lesions. While low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has been effective in managing coagulopathy and pain, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) emerge as a promising alternative. Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOACs in treating VMs associated with localized intravascular coagulopathy, offering a comparative perspective to LMWH. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 29 patients with VMs and secondary localized intravascular coagulopathy treated with DOACs between 2013 and 2023 in a single tertiary center specialized in vascular anomalies. Data were collected from February 24, 2023, to September 1, 2023. Results: Patients' median age was 40 years (range, 22-76 years), with a female predominance of 66%. Descriptive statistical analysis showed that 85% of patients experienced pain improvement, and 86% showed a reduction in D-dimer by at least 25%, with a mean reduction of 57% (SD, ±32%; IQR, [38-81%]). Additionally, 37% of patients reported a bleeding event, mostly minor. Conclusion: The study findings suggests that DOACs may serve as an alternative to LMWH for patients with VMs associated with pain management and reduced D-dimer, alongside a low observed risk of major bleeding. Tailored dosing considering the location of the malformation, bleeding and thrombotic tendencies, and laboratory abnormalities is recommended. Future studies with larger cohorts and extended follow-up are necessary for more conclusive evidence on DOACs' role in this patient population.
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.