MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405044221 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-210935

Long-Term Outcomes of Patients with Isolated Sub-Segmental Pulmonary Embolism Managed without Anticoagulant Therapy

2024· article· en· W4405044221 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cameron Brown, Marc Carrier, Ranjeeta Mallick, Amanda Pecarskie, Joseph R. Shaw, Grégoire Le Gal

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary embolismAnticoagulant therapyTerm (time)Internal medicineIntensive care medicineCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The management of patients with isolated sub-segmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) is controversial. The 2021 update of the American College of Chest physician clinical practice guidelines suggest withholding anticoagulant therapy in patients at low risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) but to initiate anticoagulation in those at high risk of recurrent events. The SSPE prospective management cohort study, which included patients with SSPE at low risk of VTE managed without anticoagulant therapy, reported a 3-month risk of recurrent events of approximately 3%. However, the long-term risk of recurrent VTE (i.e., beyond the initial 3 months) is unknown. We sought to establish the long-term incidence rates of recurrent VTE and clinically relevant bleeding complications in this patient population. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients included in the SSPE prospective management cohort study included at The Ottawa Hospital between 2011 and 2021. The primary outcome of the study was a major recurrent VTE occurring beyond the initial three months of follow-up. Major VTE was defined as recurrent proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) (segmental or more proximal). Secondary outcomes included any recurrent VTE (including SSPE and distal DVT) and clinically relevant bleeding (combining major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB)) occurring beyond the initial three months of follow-up. Major bleeding and CRNMB were defined as per the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Patients were censored at the time of the event, death, last known encounter or the end of the follow-up period (April 2024). Incidence rates along with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the primary and secondary outcome measures were computed by performing time-to-event analyses using the Kaplan-Meier method. Analyses were performed using SPSS 29.0 (IBM Corp.). Results: A total of 138 patients with isolated SSPE were included in the analysis. Mean age was 52.3 ± 16.6 years and 50.7% were female. The mean duration of follow-up was 6.0 years (range 0 to 13 years). Overall, recurrent major VTE occurred in 15 out of the 138 patients leading to an incidence rate of 1.93 per 100 patient-years (95% CI: 1.17-3.16). Among these, 9 patients experienced a recurrent PE (segmental or more proximal), 4 had a proximal DVT (3 lower extremity and 1 upper extremity), and 2 had both PE and DVT. Any VTE were observed in 23 out of the 138 patients, resulting in an incidence rate of 3.09 per 100 patient-years (95% CI: 2.07-4.59). Despite not being managed with anticoagulant therapy, clinically relevant bleeding was reported in 15 patients during the follow-up period, corresponding to a cumulative incidence rate of 1.88 per 100 patient-years (95% CI: 1.14-3.08). Of these, 12 patients experienced clinically relevant non-major bleeding, while 3 patients experienced major bleeding. Conclusion: The long-term incidence of VTE is relatively low in patients with isolated SSPE managed without anticoagulation, yet higher than that observed in the general population. The incidence rates of clinically relevant bleeding without anticoagulation is not negligeable. Future studies are needed to assess the risk benefit ratio of anticoagulation 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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