ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2026
A 10-year review of iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis - are they more dangerous than their distal counterparts?
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Thrombectomy reduces femoral vein valve damage after acute iliofemoral vein thrombosis: a combined retrospective and prospective cohort study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (IFDVT) is associated with potential for poor outcomes despite optimal anticoagulation therapy. To characterize the real-world management of IFDVT in an Australian population. Retrospective evaluation of IFDVT cases managed at Northern Health, Australia from January 2011 to December 2020 was performed and compared to non-iliofemoral lower limb DVTs (non-IFDVT) (n = 1793). 375 IFDVT episodes (median age 69 years; 54.7% female (n = 205)) were diagnosed with median follow-up 56 months. 61.6% (n = 231) were provoked events, including 100 episodes (26.7%) of cancer-associated thrombosis. 24.8% (n = 93) of patients had concomitant pulmonary embolism. Eleven cases underwent endovascular intervention including all seven patients with May-Thurner syndrome. Non-cancer patients with IFDVT received longer duration of anticoagulation (8 vs. 6 months, p < 0.001) or indefinite anticoagulation (28.7% vs. 16.0%, p < 0.001) compared to those with non-IFDVTs. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence (2.3/100PY, HR 0.839, 95% CI 0.562-1.255, p = 0.390) and major bleeding (2.7/100PY, HR 1.679, 95% CI: 0.876-3.220, p = 0.119) were comparable but the 30-day all-cause mortality (5.1% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.001) including thrombosis-related deaths (1.8% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.004) was more common in the non-cancer IFDVTs. In cancer patients, VTE recurrence rate (4.3/100PY, p = 0.421) was similar but major bleeding (12.4/100PY, p = 0.043) and 30-day mortality (23.0%, p = 0.026) was higher compared to IFDVT patients without active cancer. While the VTE recurrence and major bleeding were comparable between patients with IFDVT and non-IFDVTs, 30-day mortality (including thrombosis-related death) was higher in patients with IFDVT, suggesting a higher risk cohort that warrants careful assessment particularly during the acute period post diagnosis.
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.