MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Venous Thromboembolism Recurrence after a First Episode of Provoked Venous Thrombosis Due to a Transient Risk Factor. A Systematic Review of the Literature

2008· review· en· W2560257042 on OpenAlexaff
Alfonso Iorio, Esmeralda Filippucci, Maura Marcucci, Clive Kearon, Gualtiero Palareti

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRisk factorVenous thromboembolismVenous thrombosisSurgeryRandomized controlled trialThrombosisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) has a tendency to recur after anticoagulation is stopped. The optimal duration of anticoagulation is influenced by the risk of recurrence: indefinite anticoagulation is recommended after a first VTE associated with a persistent and strong risk factor (e.g. cancer), whereas three months of anticoagulation is adequate if VTE was provoked by a transient risk factor (e.g. surgery). The optimal duration of anticoagulation after a first unprovoked VTE is, however, still a matter of debate. An attractive approach is to identify subgroups of patients with unprovoked VTE who have a high risk of recurrence and treat them with prolonged anticoagulation, and subgroups with a lower risk of recurrence and treat them for only three months. A critical issue, therefore, is to determine a cut-off value for risk of recurrence that is low enough to justify stopping anticoagulant therapy at three months (i.e., a rate of recurrence that is acceptable to patients and physicians). We propose that the rate of recurrence after VTE that was provoked by a transient risk factor represents such a value. Aim of the study: To accurately estimate the risk of recurrence in patients with VTE provoked by a transient risk factor who have completed at least three months of anticoagulant therapy. Materials and Methods: Medline, Embase and Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Randomized Trials were searched for any studies reporting the recurrence rate of VTE after a first episode of VTE associated with a transient risk factor (surgery, trauma, plaster, bed rest, pregnancy, puerperium, hormone treatment). The references of retrieved articles were scanned for any additional relevant studies. Studies were included if enrolling patients met the following criteria: a first episode of VTE provoked by a transient risk factor; a course of at least three months of oral anticoagulant therapy; a follow up of 12 or 24 months after treatment discontinuation with assessment of VTE recurrence rate. Recurrence rate, or data that allowed its calculation, needed to be reported. An overall estimate of the recurrence rate was calculated following Laird (Stats Med 1990), having predefined to use a fixed-effect model if no heterogeneity was found among the studies or a random-effect model otherwise. The inverse variance method was used to calculate weights for the studies. Results: The literature search yield 1089 references. After careful scanning of the potentially relevant papers, 15 papers were included in the final analysis. All studies except one were prospective. 12/15 and 11/15 studies reported data about the recurrence rate at 12 and 24 months, respectively. Overall there were 106 events among of 2217 patients at 12 months and 160 events among 2321 patients at 24 months. The pooled recurrence rate was 4.0% (95% C.I. 3.0%–5.2%) at 12 months and 6.7% (95% C.I. 5.2%–8.6%) at 24 months. Conclusion: The cumulative risk of recurrence in patients with VTE provoked by a reversible risk factor is 6.7% (95% C.I. 5.2%–8.6%) two years after anticoagulant withdrawal. We suggest that it acceptable to stop anticoagulant therapy after three months in subgroups of patients with unprovoked VTE who have been shown to have a risk of recurrence that is similar to, or lower than, this rate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0130.013
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→