ReviewCureus2025
Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT), distinct in etiology from lower limb DVT, often arises from catheter use, malignancy, or thoracic outlet syndrome. While direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are established for lower limb DVT, their role in UEDVT remains understudied. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of DOACs compared to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in UEDVT. A systematic PubMed search identified nine studies (643 DOAC-treated patients). Outcomes included mortality, venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, pulmonary embolism (PE), and major bleeding. DOACs demonstrated significantly lower mortality (2.49% vs. 16.5-27.5%; p<0.001), VTE recurrence (0.93% vs. 5%; p<0.001), and PE incidence (0.31% vs. 5-8%; p<0.001) compared to historical LMWH data. However, major bleeding rates were higher with DOACs (2.02% vs. 0.25%; p<0.001). Patient cohorts predominantly had cancer-related (66.7%) or catheter-associated (64.5%) UEDVT, with rivaroxaban being the most used DOAC (70.9%). Median treatment duration was three months, with a six-month follow-up. These findings suggest DOACs may offer superior efficacy in reducing mortality and thrombotic complications in UEDVT, though with an increased bleeding risk. Limitations include reliance on historical LMWH comparisons, heterogeneity in study designs, and small event counts for PE. Standardized imaging and extended follow-up are needed to assess long-term outcomes. While DOACs present a promising alternative, cautious use in high-bleeding-risk patients is warranted. Further randomized trials are essential to validate these results and refine clinical guidelines.
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.