MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389233727 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-189554

The Efficacy and Safely of Anticoagulation for the Management of Gonadal Vein Thrombosis

2023· article· en· W4389233727 on OpenAlexaff
Cameron Brown, Sarah Ng, Farah Zarka, Aurélien Delluc, Marc Carrier

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombosisPopulationIncidence (geometry)SurgeryDeep veinObservational studyCumulative incidenceConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialVenous thrombosisInternal medicineCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Gonadal vein thrombosis (GVT) is an uncommon condition that has been associated with different risk factors (e.g., post-partum period, cancer, recent pelvic surgery, etc.). The optimal management of GVT remains unclear. Anticoagulation therapy may help to mitigate the risk of thrombosis extension and recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) but may also be associated with bleeding complications.We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation therapy in patients with GVT. Methods A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed for randomized controlled trials and observational studies was performed . Studies with patients presenting with GVT defined as ovarian vein thrombosis or testicular vein thrombosis and reporting at least one of the desired outcomes were included in the analysis.The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent VTE, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding episode. Secondary outcomes included clinically relevant non-major bleeding and overall mortality. Incidence rates of the outcomes were pooled using the random effects model and expressed as event per 100 patient-years with its associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using R software. Results The search strategy identified 7084 article records. A total of 13 observational studies (1039 patients) with GVT met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Only one study reported the incidence of testicular vein thrombosis. Hence, 96% of the total patient population were females with ovarian vein thrombosis. Overall, the incidence rate per 100 patient-years for recurrent VTE was 3.60 (95% CI: 2.12-6.13; I-square 75%; Figure 1). A large majority of studies did not report if recurrent events occurred during or following discontinuation of anticoagulation. Similarly, most studies did not report on major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events, or overall mortality preventing the possibility of conducting pooled analyses for these outcomes. Conclusion GVT seems to be associated with a relatively low risk of recurrent VTE. However, it remains unclear if anticoagulant therapy is associated with a favorable risk/benefit ratio. Future studies (e.g., registries, population-based studies) are needed to investigate the efficacy of anticoagulant and whether it outweighs the risk of bleeding in this patient population.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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