IMPORTANCE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a common and potentially fatal disease. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the advances in ...diagnosis and treatment of VTE of the past 5 years. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A systematic search was conducted in EMBASE Classic, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, and other nonindexed citations using broad terms for diagnosis and treatment of VTE to find systematic reviews and meta-analyses, randomized trials, and prospective cohort studies published between January 1, 2013, and July 31, 2018. The 10th edition of the American College of Chest Physicians Antithrombotic Therapy Guidelines was screened to identify additional studies. Screening of titles, abstracts, and, subsequently, full-text articles was performed in duplicate, as well as data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment of the included articles. FINDINGS: Thirty-two articles were included in this review. The application of an age-adjusted D-dimer threshold in patients with suspected PE has increased the number of patients in whom imaging can be withheld. The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-Out Criteria safely exclude PE when the pretest probability is low. The introduction of direct oral anticoagulants has allowed for a simplified treatment of VTE with a lower risk of bleeding regardless of etiology or extent of the VTE (except for massive PE) and has made extended secondary prevention more acceptable. Thrombolysis is best reserved for patients with massive PE or those with DVT and threatened limb loss. Insertion of inferior vena cava filters should be avoided unless anticoagulation is absolutely contraindicated in patients with recent acute VTE. Graduated compression stockings are no longer recommended to treat DVT but may be used when acute or chronic symptoms are present. Anticoagulation may no longer be indicated for patients with isolated distal DVT at low risk of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Over the past 5 years, substantial progress has been made in VTE management, allowing for diagnostic and therapeutic strategies tailored to individual patient characteristics, preferences, and values.
Patients receiving cancer treatment who had an intermediate-to-high risk of venous thromboembolism were randomly assigned to apixaban or placebo for 6 months. VTE was noted in 4.2% of patients ...receiving apixaban and 10.2% of those receiving placebo, a significant difference. Major bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients with apixaban and in 1.8% with placebo.
Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism Wells, Philip S; Forgie, Melissa A; Rodger, Marc A
JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association,
02/2014, Volume:
311, Issue:
7
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
IMPORTANCE Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a common, potentially lethal condition with acute morbidity. OBJECTIVE To review the ...etiology of VTE and the 3 phases of VTE treatment: acute (first 5-10 days), long-term (from end of acute treatment to 3-6 months), and extended (beyond 3-6 months). EVIDENCE REVIEW Cochrane reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials, as well as other clinical trials for topics not covered by the former, were reviewed. Literature searches using broad terms were used to find meta-analyses published in the last 15 years. The ninth edition of the American College of Chest Physicians Antithrombotic Therapy Guidelines was used to supplement the literature search. Guidelines from specialty organizations were consulted when relevant. The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health was searched for relevant cost-effectiveness studies. We also searched our own literature database of 8386 articles for relevant research. FINDINGS Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) along with with vitamin K antagonists and the benefits and proven safety of ambulation have allowed for outpatient management of most cases of DVT in the acute phase. Development of new oral anticoagulants further simplifies acute-phase treatment and 2 oral agents can be used as monotherapy, avoiding the need for LMWH. Patients with PE can also be treated in the acute phase as outpatients, a decision dependent on prognosis and severity of PE. Thrombolysis is best reserved for severe VTE; inferior vena cava filters, ideally the retrievable variety, should be used when anticoagulation is contraindicated. In general, DVT and PE patients require 3 months of treatment with anticoagulants, with options including LMWH, vitamin K antagonists, or direct factor Xa or direct factor IIa inhibitors. After this time, decisions for further treatment are based on balancing the risk of VTE recurrence, determined by etiology of the VTE (transient risk factors, unprovoked or malignancy associated), against the risk of major hemorrhage from treatment. Better prediction tools for major hemorrhage are needed. Experience with new oral anticoagulants as acute, long-term, and extended therapy options is limited as yet, but as a class they appear to be safe and effective for all phases of treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The mainstay of VTE treatment is anticoagulation, while interventions such as thrombolysis and inferior vena cava filters are reserved for limited circumstances. Multiple therapeutic modes and options exist for VTE treatment with small but nonetheless important differential effects to consider. Anticoagulants will probably always increase bleeding risk, necessitating tailored treatment strategies that must incorporate etiology, risk, benefit, cost, and patient preference. Although great progress has been made, further study to understand individual patient risks is needed to make ideal treatment decisions.
This is the 2nd update to the 9th edition of these guidelines. We provide recommendations on 17 PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) questions, four of which have not been addressed ...previously.
We generate strong and weak recommendations based on high-, moderate-, and low-certainty evidence, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology.
The panel generated 29 guidance statements, 13 of which are graded as strong recommendations, covering aspects of antithrombotic management of VTE from initial management through secondary prevention and risk reduction of postthrombotic syndrome. Four new guidance statements have been added that did not appear in the 9th edition (2012) or 1st update (2016). Eight statements have been substantially modified from the 1st update.
New evidence has emerged since 2016 that further informs the standard of care for patients with VTE. Substantial uncertainty remains regarding important management questions, particularly in limited disease and special patient populations.
This is the 2nd update to the 9th edition of these guidelines. We provide recommendations on 17 PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) questions, four of which have not been addressed ...previously.
We generate strong and weak recommendations based on high-, moderate-, and low-certainty evidence, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology.
The panel generated 29 guidance statements, 13 of which are graded as strong recommendations, covering aspects of antithrombotic management of VTE from initial management through secondary prevention and risk reduction of postthrombotic syndrome. Four new guidance statements have been added that did not appear in the 9th edition (2012) or 1st update (2016). Eight statements have been substantially modified from the 1st update.
New evidence has emerged since 2016 that further informs the standard of care for patients with VTE. Substantial uncertainty remains regarding important management questions, particularly in limited disease and special patient populations.
Thus far, all the clinical models developed to predict major bleeding in patients on extended anticoagulation therapy use the baseline predictors to stratify patients into different risk groups. ...Therefore, these models do not account for the clinical changes and events that occur after the baseline visit, which can modify risk of bleeding. However, it is difficult to develop predictive models from the routine follow-up clinical interviews, which are irregular sequences of multivariate time series data.
To demonstrate that deep learning can incorporate patient time series follow-up data to improve prediction of major bleeding.
We used the baseline and follow-up data that were collected over 8 years in a longitudinal cohort study of 2542 patients, of whom 118 had major bleeding. Four supervised neural network–based machine-learning models were trained on the baseline, follow-up, or both datasets using 70% of the data. The performance of these models was evaluated, along with modified versions of 6 previously developed clinical models, on the remaining 30% of the data.
An ensemble of feedforward and recurrent neural networks that used the baseline and follow-up data was the best-performing model, achieving a sensitivity and a specificity of 61% and 82%, respectively, in identifying major bleeding, and it outperformed the previously developed clinical models in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (82%) and area under the precision–recall curve (14%).
Time series follow-up data can improve major bleeding prediction in patients on extended anticoagulation therapy.
Patients with active cancer have a heightened risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This risk is further increased by the initiation of chemotherapy. Although previous studies have suggested that the ...use of parenteral thromboprophylaxis in all ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy significantly decreases the rate of VTE, current clinical practice guidelines do not recommend routine use of thromboprophylaxis in this patient population. A major criticism of these studies has been the inclusion of patients at lower risk for VTE, which may have diluted the potential beneficial effect of the parenteral thromboprophylaxis. It is therefore imperative to appropriately risk stratify ambulatory cancer patients using a validated scoring system (e.g. Khorana risk score) in order to identify those most likely to benefit from thromboprophylaxis. Direct oral anticoagulants, such as apixaban, may offer a convenient and safe option for thromboprophylaxis. As such, AVERT will randomize 574 ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy who are at high-risk for VTE (as defined by a Khorana score of ≥2) to Apixaban 2.5 mg BID versus placebo. The primary study outcome will be the first episode of objectively documented symptomatic or incidental VTE (deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism) within the first 6 months (180 days ± 3) following initiation of the blinded study drug for both intervention and placebo groups. The secondary safety outcomes include major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and overall survival rates. This study will hopefully offer evidence regarding the benefit of apixaban in ambulatory patients at high risk for VTE receiving chemotherapy.
•Thromboprophylaxis decreases the risk of VTE in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.•Apixaban may be a safe and effective option for thromboprophylaxis in these patients.•AVERT will randomize cancer patients at high risk for VTE to apixaban vs. placebo.
This article addresses the treatment of VTE disease.
We generated strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high-quality (Grade A), moderate-quality (Grade B), and low-quality ...(Grade C) evidence.
For acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend initial parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Grade 1B) or anticoagulation with rivaroxaban. We suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux over IV unfractionated heparin (Grade 2C) or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for PE with hypotension (Grade 2C). For proximal DVT or PE, we recommend treatment of 3 months over shorter periods (Grade 1B). For a first proximal DVT or PE that is provoked by surgery or by a nonsurgical transient risk factor, we recommend 3 months of therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if provoked by a nonsurgical risk factor and low or moderate bleeding risk); that is unprovoked, we suggest extended therapy if bleeding risk is low or moderate (Grade 2B) and recommend 3 months of therapy if bleeding risk is high (Grade 1B); and that is associated with active cancer, we recommend extended therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if high bleeding risk) and suggest LMWH over vitamin K antagonists (Grade 2B). We suggest vitamin K antagonists or LMWH over dabigatran or rivaroxaban (Grade 2B). We suggest compression stockings to prevent the postthrombotic syndrome (Grade 2B). For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we suggest prophylactic-dose fondaparinux or LMWH over no anticoagulation (Grade 2B), and suggest fondaparinux over LMWH (Grade 2C).
Strong recommendations apply to most patients, whereas weak recommendations are sensitive to differences among patients, including their preferences.
Apixaban (2.5 mg) taken twice daily has been shown to substantially reduce the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with placebo for the primary thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory patients ...with cancer who are starting chemotherapy and are at intermediate-to-high risk of VTE. We aimed to compare the health system costs and health benefits associated with primary thromboprophylaxis using apixaban with those associated with the current standard of care (where no primary thromboprophylaxis is given), from the perspective of Canada's publicly funded health care system in this subpopulation of patients with cancer over a lifetime horizon.
We performed a cost-utility analysis to estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with primary thromboprophylaxis using apixaban. We obtained baseline event rates and the efficacy of apixaban from the Apixaban for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in High-Risk Ambulatory Cancer Patients (AVERT) trial on apixaban prophylaxis. We estimated relative risk for bleeding, risk of complications associated with VTE treatment, mortality rates, costs and utilities from other published sources.
Over a lifetime horizon, apixaban resulted in lower costs to the health system (Can$7902.98 v. Can$14 875.82) and an improvement in QALYs (9.089 v. 9.006). The key driver of cost-effectiveness results was the relative risk of VTE as a result of apixaban. Results from the probabilistic analysis showed that at a willingness to pay of Can$50 000 per QALY, the strategy with the highest probability of being most cost-effective was apixaban, with a probability of 99.87%.
We found that apixaban is a cost-saving option for the primary thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory patients with cancer who are starting chemotherapy and are at intermediate-to-high risk of VTE.
Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an uncommon but potentially devastating complication of anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Our ...objective was to determine and compare the incidences of HIT in surgical and medical patients receiving thromboprophylaxis with either UFH or LMWH. All relevant studies identified in the MEDLINE database (1984-2004), not limited by language, and from reference lists of key articles were evaluated. Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with UFH and LMWH and measuring HIT or thrombocytopenia as outcomes were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data on thromboprophylaxis (type, dose, frequency, and duration), definition of thrombocytopenia, HIT assay, and rates of the following outcomes: HIT, thrombocytopenia, and thromboembolic events. HIT was defined as a decrease in platelets to less than 50% or to less than 100 × 109/L and positive laboratory HIT assay. Fifteen studies (7287 patients) were eligible: 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) measuring HIT (1014 patients), 3 prospective studies (1464 patients) with nonrandomized comparison groups in which HIT was appropriately measured in both groups, and 10 RCTs (4809 patients) measuring thrombocytopenia but not HIT. Three analyses were performed using a random effects model and favored the use of LMWH: (1) RCTs measuring HIT showed an odds ratio (OR) of 0.10 (95% confidence interval CI, 0.01-0.2; P = .03); (2) prospective studies measuring HIT showed an OR of 0.10 (95% CI, 0.03-0.33; P < .001); (3) all 15 studies measured thrombocytopenia. The OR was 0.47 (95% CI, 0.22-1.02; P = .06). The inverse variance–weighted average that determined the absolute risk for HIT with LMWH was 0.2%, and with UFH the risk was 2.6%. Most studies were of patients after orthopedic surgery.
PDF
