BackgroundIn patients clinically suspected of having pulmonary embolism (PE), physicians often rely on intuitive estimation (“gestalt”) of PE presence. Although shown to be predictive, gestalt is... Show moreBackgroundIn patients clinically suspected of having pulmonary embolism (PE), physicians often rely on intuitive estimation (“gestalt”) of PE presence. Although shown to be predictive, gestalt is criticized for its assumed variation across physicians and lack of standardization.ObjectivesTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of gestalt in the diagnosis of PE and gain insight into its possible variation.MethodsWe performed an individual patient data meta-analysis including patients suspected of having PE. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of gestalt for the diagnosis of PE, quantified as risk ratio (RR) between gestalt and PE based on 2-stage random-effect log-binomial meta-analysis regression as well as gestalts’ sensitivity and specificity. The variability of these measures was explored across different health care settings, publication period, PE prevalence, patient subgroups (sex, heart failure, chronic lung disease, and items of the Wells score other than gestalt), and age.ResultsWe analyzed 20 770 patients suspected of having PE from 16 original studies. The prevalence of PE in patients with and without a positive gestalt was 28.8% vs 9.1%, respectively. The overall RR was 3.02 (95% CI, 2.35-3.87), and the overall sensitivity and specificity were 74% (95% CI, 68%-79%) and 61% (95% CI, 53%-68%), respectively. Although variation was observed across individual studies (I2, 90.63%), the diagnostic accuracy was consistent across all subgroups and health care settings.ConclusionA positive gestalt was associated with a 3-fold increased risk of PE in suspected patients. Although variation was observed across studies, the RR of gestalt was similar across prespecified subgroups and health care settings, exemplifying its diagnostic value for all patients suspected of having PE. Show less
AimsRisk stratification is used for decisions regarding need for imaging in patients with clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim was to develop a clinical prediction model that... Show moreAimsRisk stratification is used for decisions regarding need for imaging in patients with clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim was to develop a clinical prediction model that provides an individualized, accurate probability estimate for the presence of acute PE in patients with suspected disease based on readily available clinical items and D-dimer concentrations.Methods and resultsAn individual patient data meta-analysis was performed based on sixteen cross-sectional or prospective studies with data from 28 305 adult patients with clinically suspected PE from various clinical settings, including primary care, emergency care, hospitalized and nursing home patients. A multilevel logistic regression model was built and validated including ten a priori defined objective candidate predictors to predict objectively confirmed PE at baseline or venous thromboembolism (VTE) during follow-up of 30 to 90 days. Multiple imputation was used for missing data. Backward elimination was performed with a P-value <0.10. Discrimination (c-statistic with 95% confidence intervals [CI] and prediction intervals [PI]) and calibration (outcome:expected [O:E] ratio and calibration plot) were evaluated based on internal-external cross-validation. The accuracy of the model was subsequently compared with algorithms based on the Wells score and D-dimer testing. The final model included age (in years), sex, previous VTE, recent surgery or immobilization, haemoptysis, cancer, clinical signs of deep vein thrombosis, inpatient status, D-dimer (in µg/L), and an interaction term between age and D-dimer. The pooled c-statistic was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85–0.89; 95% PI, 0.77–0.93) and overall calibration was very good (pooled O:E ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87–1.14; 95% PI, 0.55–1.79). The model slightly overestimated VTE probability in the lower range of estimated probabilities. Discrimination of the current model in the validation data sets was better than that of the Wells score combined with a D-dimer threshold based on age (c-statistic 0.73; 95% CI, 0.70–0.75) or structured clinical pretest probability (c-statistic 0.79; 95% CI, 0.76–0.81).ConclusionThe present model provides an absolute, individualized probability of PE presence in a broad population of patients with suspected PE, with very good discrimination and calibration. Its clinical utility needs to be evaluated in a prospective management or impact study. Show less
Background: COVID-19-related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology ... Show moreBackground: COVID-19-related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for patients with COVID-19. Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel, including 3 patient representatives, and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Centre supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to January 2022). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the GRADE approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update to guidelines published in February 2021 and May 2021 as part of the living phase of these guidelines. Results: The panel made 1 additional recommendation: a conditional recommendation for the use of prophylactic-intensity over therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE. The panel emphasized the need for an individualized assessment of thrombotic and bleeding risk. Conclusions: This conditional recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for additional, high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness. Show less
Background: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology ... Show moreBackground: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in making decisions about the use of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19. Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included patient representatives and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process and performed systematic evidence reviews (through November 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update to guidelines published in February 2021 as part of the living phase of these guidelines. Results: The panel made one additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of therapeutic-intensity over prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related acute illness who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE. The panel empha-sized the need for an individualized assessment of risk of thrombosis and bleeding. The panel also noted that heparin (unfractionated or low molecular weight) may be preferred because of a preponderance of evidence with this class of anticoagulants. Conclusion: This conditional recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for additional, high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related acute illness. Show less
Background: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH... Show moreBackground: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE.Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel, including 3 patient representatives, and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.Results: The panel agreed on 1 additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation against the use of outpatient anticoagulant prophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 who are discharged from the hospital and who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE or another indication for anticoagulation.Conclsions: This recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality randomized controlled trials assessing the role of postdischarge thromboprophylaxis. Other key research priorities include better evidence on assessing risk of thrombosis and bleeding outcomes in patients with COVID-19 after hospital discharge. Show less
Background:The incidence of pulmonary embolism has been increasing, but its case-fatality rate is decreasing, suggesting a lesser severity of illness. The clinical importance of patients with... Show moreBackground:The incidence of pulmonary embolism has been increasing, but its case-fatality rate is decreasing, suggesting a lesser severity of illness. The clinical importance of patients with pulmonary embolism isolated to the subsegmental vessels is unknown.Objective:To determine the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with subsegmental pulmonary embolism managed without anticoagulation.Design:Multicenter prospective cohort study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01455818)Setting:Eighteen sites between February 2011 and February 2021.Patients:Patients with isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism.Intervention:At diagnosis, patients underwent bilateral lower-extremity venous ultrasonography, which was repeated 1 week later if results were negative. Patients without deep venous thrombosis did not receive anticoagulant therapy.Measurements:The primary outcome was recurrent venous thromboembolism during the 90-day follow-up period.Results:Recruitment was stopped prematurely because the predefined stopping rule was met after 292 of a projected 300 patients were enrolled. Of the 266 patients included in the primary analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 8 patients, for a cumulative incidence of 3.1% (95% CI, 1.6% to 6.1%) over the 90-day follow-up. The incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism was 2.1% (CI, 0.8% to 5.5%) and 5.7% (CI, 2.2% to 14.4%) over the 90-day follow-up in patients with single and multiple isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism, respectively. No patients had a fatal recurrent pulmonary embolism.Limitation:The study was restricted to patients with low-risk subsegmental pulmonary embolism.Conclusion:Overall, patients with subsegmental pulmonary embolism who did not have proximal deep venous thrombosis had a higher-than-expected rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism. Show less
Background: How diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) perform in relevant patient subgroups defined by sex, age, cancer, and previous venous thromboembolism (VTE) is unknown.... Show moreBackground: How diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) perform in relevant patient subgroups defined by sex, age, cancer, and previous venous thromboembolism (VTE) is unknown. Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficiency of the Wells and revised Geneva scores combined with fixed and adapted D-dimer thresholds, as well as the YEARS algorithm, for ruling out acute PE in these subgroups. Data Sources: MEDLINE from 1 January 1995 until 1 January 2021. Study Selection: 16 studies assessing at least 1 diagnostic strategy. Data Extraction: Individual-patient data from 20553 patients. Data Synthesis: Safety was defined as the diagnostic failure rate (the predicted 3-month VTE incidence after exclusion of PE without imaging at baseline). Efficiency was defined as the proportion of individuals classified by the strategy as "PE con -sidered excluded" without imaging tests. Across all strategies, efficiency was highest in patients younger than 40 years (47% to 68%) and lowest in patients aged 80 years or older (6.0% to 23%) or patients with cancer (9.6% to 26%). However, efficiency improved considerably in these subgroups when pretest probabil-ity-dependent D-dimer thresholds were applied. Predicted failure rates were highest for strategies with adapted D-dimer thresh-olds, with failure rates varying between 2% and 4% in the pre-defined patient subgroups. Limitations: Between-study differences in scoring predictor items and D-dimer assays, as well as the presence of differential verifica-tion bias, in particular for classifying fatal events and subsegmental PE cases, all of which may have led to an overestimation of the predicted failure rates of adapted D-dimer thresholds. Conclusion: Overall, all strategies showed acceptable safety, with pretest probability-dependent D-dimer thresholds having not only the highest efficiency but also the highest predicted failure rate. From an efficiency perspective, this individual-patient data meta-analysis supports application of adapted D-dimer thresholds. Primary Funding Source: Dutch Research Council. (PROSPERO: CRD42018089366) Show less
Background: The incidence of pulmonary embolism has been increasing, but its case-fatality rate is decreasing, sug-gesting a lesser severity of illness. The clinical importance of patients with... Show moreBackground: The incidence of pulmonary embolism has been increasing, but its case-fatality rate is decreasing, sug-gesting a lesser severity of illness. The clinical importance of patients with pulmonary embolism isolated to the subseg-mental vessels is unknown.Objective: To determine the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with subsegmental pulmonary embolism managed without anticoagulation.Design: Multicenter prospective cohort study. (ClinicalTrials. gov: NCT01455818)Setting: Eighteen sites between February 2011 and February 2021.Patients: Patients with isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism.Intervention: At diagnosis, patients underwent bilateral lower-extremity venous ultrasonography, which was repeated 1 week later if results were negative. Patients without deep venous thrombosis did not receive anticoagulant therapy.Measurements: The primary outcome was recurrent venous thromboembolism during the 90-day follow-up period.Results: Recruitment was stopped prematurely because the predefined stopping rule was met after 292 of a projected 300 patients were enrolled. Of the 266 patients included in the pri-mary analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 8 patients, for a cumulative incidence of 3.1% (95% CI, 1.6% to 6.1%) over the 90-day follow-up. The incidence of recurrent venous throm-boembolism was 2.1% (CI, 0.8% to 5.5%) and 5.7% (CI, 2.2% to 14.4%) over the 90-day follow-up in patients with single and multiple isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism, respec-tively. No patients had a fatal recurrent pulmonary embolism.Limitation: The study was restricted to patients with low-risk subsegmental pulmonary embolism.Conclusion: Overall, patients with subsegmental pulmonary em-bolism who did not have proximal deep venous thrombosis had a higher-than-expected rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism. Show less
Background: COVID-19-related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology ... Show moreBackground: COVID-19-related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in making decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE.Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 3 patient representatives and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Centre supported the guideline development process by performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 5 March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the GRADE approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update on guidelines published in February 2021.Results: The panel agreed on 1 additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of prophylactic-intensity over intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE.Conclusions: This recommendation was based on low certainty in the evidence, which underscores the need for additional high-quality, randomized, controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in critically ill patients. Other key research priorities include better evidence regarding predictors of thrombosis and bleeding risk in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and the impact of nonanticoagulant therapies (eg, antiviral agents, corticosteroids) on thrombotic risk. Show less
Intermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is characterized by right ventricular (RV) dysfunction and elevated circulating cardiac troponin levels despite apparent hemodynamic stability at... Show moreIntermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is characterized by right ventricular (RV) dysfunction and elevated circulating cardiac troponin levels despite apparent hemodynamic stability at presentation. In these patients, full-dose systemic thrombolysis reduced the risk of hemodynamic decompensation or death but increased the risk of life-threatening bleeding. Reduced-dose thrombolysis may be capable of improving safety while maintaining reperfusion efficacy. The Pulmonary Embolism International THrOmbolysis (PEITHO)-3 study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04430569) is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter, multinational trial with long-term follow-up. We will compare the efficacy and safety of a reduced-dose alteplase regimen with standard heparin anticoagulation. Patients with intermediate-high-risk PE will also fulfill at least one clinical criterion of severity: systolic blood pressure <= 110mm Hg, respiratory rate >20 breaths/min, or history of heart failure. The primary efficacy outcome is the composite of all-cause death, hemodynamic decompensation, or PE recurrence within 30 days of randomization. Key secondary outcomes, to be included in hierarchical analysis, are fatal or GUSTO severe or life-threatening bleeding; net clinical benefit (primary efficacy outcome plus severe or life-threatening bleeding); and all-cause death, all within 30 days. All outcomes will be adjudicated by an independent committee. Further outcomes include PE-related death, hemodynamic decompensation, or stroke within 30 days; dyspnea, functional limitation, or RV dysfunction at 6 months and 2 years; and utilization of health care resources within 30 days and 2 years. The study is planned to enroll 650 patients. The results are expected to have a major impact on risk-adjusted treatment of acute PE and inform guideline recommendations. Show less
Mahe, I.; Agnelli, G.; Ay, C.; Bamias, A.; Becattini, C.; Carrier, M.; ... ; Laporte, S. 2021
Cancer-associated thrombosis (CT) is associated with a high risk of recurrent venous thromboembolic (VTE) events that require extended anticoagulation in patients with active cancer, putting them... Show moreCancer-associated thrombosis (CT) is associated with a high risk of recurrent venous thromboembolic (VTE) events that require extended anticoagulation in patients with active cancer, putting them at risk of bleeding. The aim of the API-CAT study (NCT03692065) is to assess whether a reduced-dose regimen of apixaban (2.5mg twice daily [bid]) is noninferior to a full-dose regimen of apixaban (5mg bid) for the prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with active cancer who have completed >= 6 months of anticoagulant therapy for a documented index event of proximal deep-vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism. API-CAT is an international, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, noninferiority trial with blinded adjudication of outcome events. Consecutive patients are randomized to receive apixaban 2.5 or 5mg bid for 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome is a composite of recurrent symptomatic or incidental VTE during the treatment period. The principal safety endpoint is clinically relevant bleeding, defined as a composite of major bleeding or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. Assuming a 12-month incidence of the primary outcome of 4% with apixaban and an upper limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio <2.0, 1,722 patients will be randomized, assuming an up to 10% loss in total patient-years (beta=80%; alpha one-sided=0.025). This trial has the potential to demonstrate that a regimen of extended treatment for patients with CT beyond an initial 6 months, with a reduced apixaban dose, has an acceptable risk of recurrent VTE recurrence and decreases the risk of bleeding. Show less
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related critical illness and acute illness are associated with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of... Show moreBackground: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related critical illness and acute illness are associated with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness and acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE.Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel and applied strict management strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The panel included 3 patient representatives. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 19 August 2020). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.Results: The panel agreed on 2 recommendations. The panel issued conditional recommendations in favor of prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation over intermediate-intensity or therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness or acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE.Conclusions: These recommendations were based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation. They will be updated using a living recommendation approach as new evidence becomes available. Show less
Gal, G. le; Carrier, M.; Castellucci, L.A.; Cuker, A.; Hansen, J.B.; Klok, F.A.; ... ; ISTH CDE Task Force 2021
Clinical research in venous thromboembolism (VTE) is hindered by variability in the collection and reporting of data and outcomes. A consistent data language facilitates efficiencies, leads to... Show moreClinical research in venous thromboembolism (VTE) is hindered by variability in the collection and reporting of data and outcomes. A consistent data language facilitates efficiencies, leads to higher quality data, and permits between-study comparisons and evidence synthesis. The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) launched an international task force of more than 50 researchers to develop common data elements for clinical research in venous thromboembolism.The project was organized in seven working groups, each focusing on a topic area: General Core Data Elements; Anticoagulation and Other Therapies; Chronic VTE and Functional Outcomes; Diagnosis of VTE; Malignancy; Perioperative; and Predictors of VTE. The groups met via teleconference to collaboratively identify key data elements and develop definitions and data standards that were structured in a project-specific taxonomy. A Steering Committee met by teleconference and in-person to determine the overall scope of the project and resolve questions arising from the working groups. ISTH held an open public comment period to enable broader stakeholder involvement and feedback. The common data elements were then refined by the working groups to create a set of 512 unique data elements that are publicly available at .The ISTH VTE Common Data Elements are intended to be a living project with ongoing curation, future expansion, and adaptation to meet the needs of the thrombosis and hemostasis research community. Show less
IntroductionThe clinical significance of subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) is currently unclear. Although growing evidence from observational studies suggests that withholding anticoagulant... Show moreIntroductionThe clinical significance of subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) is currently unclear. Although growing evidence from observational studies suggests that withholding anticoagulant treatment may be a safe option in selected patients with isolated SSPE, most patients with this condition receive anticoagulant treatment, which is associated with a 90-day risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) of 0.8% and major bleeding of up to 5%. Given the ongoing controversy concerning the risk-benefit ratio of anticoagulation for isolated SSPE and the lack of evidence from randomised-controlled studies, the aim of this clinical trial is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clinical surveillance without anticoagulation in low-risk patients with isolated SSPE.Methods and analysisSAFE-SSPE (Surveillance vs. Anticoagulation For low-risk patiEnts with isolated SubSegmental Pulmonary Embolism, a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial) is an international, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group non-inferiority trial conducted in Switzerland, the Netherlands and Canada. Low-risk patients with isolated SSPE are randomised to receive clinical surveillance with either placebo (no anticoagulation) or anticoagulant treatment with rivaroxaban. All patients undergo bilateral whole-leg compression ultrasonography to exclude concomitant deep vein thrombosis before enrolment. Patients are followed for 90 days. The primary outcome is symptomatic recurrent VTE (efficacy). The secondary outcomes include clinically significant bleeding and all-cause mortality (safety). The ancillary outcomes are health-related quality of life, functional status and medical resource utilisation.Ethics and disseminationThe local ethics committees in Switzerland have approved this protocol. Submission to the Ethical Committees in the Netherlands and Canada is underway. The results of this trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT04263038. Show less
