Predictors of the Development of Post-Thrombotic Syndrome after Acute Symptomatic Deep Vein Thrombosis: Two-Year Results from a Canadian Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study (The VETO Study).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Objectives: It is not understood why some patients develop post thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after DVT while others recover without sequelae. We performed a prospective, multicenter study of long-term outcomes after DVT (the Venous Thrombosis Outcomes [VETO] Study) whose principal aim was to identify predictors of PTS. Methods: From 2001–2002, consecutive patients with objectively diagnosed DVT were recruited at 7 hospital centres. During study visits at Baseline, 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24 months, clinical data were collected, thrombophilia testing was performed and standardized assessments for PTS (using Villalta scale) were carried out by trained personnel. Patients were classified as having developed PTS if the ipsilateral Villalta score was ≥5 on at least 2 visits or at the final follow-up visit, and severe PTS if a score of >14 or a venous ulcer was documented on any one occasion. The influence of clinical, demographic, ergonomic and biological determinants on the risk of developing PTS was evaluated in bivariate and multivariate analyses. Results: 359 patients were recruited; 49% were male, mean age was 56 years, 2/3 were outpatients and 55% had proximal DVT. The cumulative risk of PTS was 37%, of which 1 in 6 cases was severe. Patients who developed PTS, compared with those who did not, were more likely to be older (p=.005), have had previous episode(s) of DVT (p=.0003), have atherosclerosis risk factors [hypertension (p=.0002), high cholesterol (p=.02)], higher BMI (p=0.0007), longer duration of symptoms before DVT diagnosis (p=.049) and work in a job with high physical demands (p=.05), and they were less likely to have the Prothrombin gene mutation (p=0.03). Variables of interest that did not influence the risk of PTS included: sex, location of DVT (proximal vs. distal), side of DVT (left vs. right), type of DVT (cancer-related, temporary risk factors [e.g. surgery, trauma] or idiopathic), initial anticoagulation with LMWH vs. UFH, duration of warfarin, Factor V Leiden mutation or prior ipsilateral musculoskeletal condition. In adjusted multivariate analyses, BMI (odds ratio [OR] 2.1 for BMI >30 vs. < 30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1, 4.2), previous DVT (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.4, 4.9) and hypertension (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.04, 3.6) were independently associated with PTS. Conclusions: In our cohort, high BMI, previous history of DVT and hypertension were independent predictors of PTS, whereas presenting characteristics of the index DVT and its treatment did not influence the risk of developing PTS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".