Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40475025›Full record

ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2025

Prevalence and factors associated with high-risk thrombophilia: a single-center cross-sectional study of 3550 patients at a tertiary Thrombosis Centre in Switzerland.

Shabnam Najaf Zadeh, Fabienne Schmidli, Katarzyna Aleksandra Jalowiec, Tobias Tritschler, Yan Xu, Alan Haynes, Grégoire Le Gal, Anne Angelillo-Scherrer, Kristina Vrotniakaite-Bajerciene

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors.

Shabnam Najaf ZadehDepartment of Hematology and Central Hematology Laboratory, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Fabienne SchmidliDepartment of Hematology and Central Hematology Laboratory, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Katarzyna Aleksandra JalowiecDepartment of Hematology and Central Hematology Laboratory, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Tobias TritschlerDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Yan XuDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Alan HaynesClinical Trial Unit Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Grégoire Le GalDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Anne Angelillo-ScherrerDepartment of Hematology and Central Hematology Laboratory, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Kristina Vrotniakaite-BajercieneDepartment of Hematology and Central Hematology Laboratory, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Thrombophilia testing remains controversial, with no standardized recommendations across patient populations. Objectives: Given the clinical significance of high-risk thrombophilia (homozygous factor V Leiden or prothrombin G20210A mutations, natural anticoagulant deficiencies, and antiphospholipid antibody syndrome [APS]), we aimed to determine its prevalence and the clinical and laboratory factors associated with its diagnosis across diverse patient populations. Methods: We conducted a single-center cross-sectional study of 3550 patients tested for thrombophilia at a tertiary thrombosis clinic between 2010 and 2020. Analyses were performed in the entire cohort and by referral indication. Univariate logistic regression was used to calculate the effect measures between clinical and laboratory characteristics of referred patients and high-risk thrombophilia. Results: High-risk hereditary thrombophilia and APS were found in 155 (8%) and 67 (3%) tested patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), in 25 (7%) and 40 (7%) tested patients with unexplained arterial thrombosis, and in 18 (17.2%) and 12 (11%) tested women with pregnancy-related morbidity, respectively. The prevalence of high-risk hereditary thrombophilia and APS was comparable in patients with unprovoked and major risk factor-provoked VTE (5.2% vs 8.2%, Conclusion: High-risk thrombophilia was mostly prevalent in women with pregnancy-related morbidity. The prevalence of thrombophilia in patients with VTE was comparable, irrespective of VTE risk factors. Several clinical characteristics were associated with high-risk hereditary thrombophilia in patients with VTE.

Indexed as

arterial thrombosispregnancy-related morbidityprevalencethrombophiliavenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID40475025
PMCPMC12138441

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.