Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 appears to be associated with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the risk of clinically relevant VTE in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.MethodsThis meta-analysis included original articles in English published from January 1st, 2020 to June 15th, 2020 in Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane. Outcomes were major VTE, defined as any objectively diagnosed pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Primary analysis estimated the risk of VTE, stratified by acutely and critically ill inpatients. Secondary analyses explored the separate risk of proximal DVT and of PE; the risk of major VTE stratified by screening and by type of anticoagulation.ResultsIn 33 studies (n = 4009 inpatients) with heterogeneous thrombotic risk factors, VTE incidence was 9% (95%CI 5-13%, I2 = 92.5) overall, and 21% (95%CI 14-28%, I2 = 87.6%) for patients hospitalized in the ICU. Proximal lower limb DVT incidence was 3% (95%CI 1-5%, I2 = 87.0%) and 8% (95%CI 3-14%, I2 = 87.6%), respectively. PE incidence was 8% (95%CI 4-13%, I2 = 92.1%) and 17% (95%CI 11-25%, I2 = 89.3%), respectively. Screening and absence of anticoagulation were associated with a higher VTE incidence. When restricting to medically ill inpatients, the VTE incidence was 2% (95%CI 0-6%).ConclusionsThe risk of major VTE among COVID-19 inpatients is high but varies greatly with severity of the disease. These findings reinforce the need for the use of thromboprophylaxis in all COVID-19 inpatients and for clinical trials testing different thromboprophylaxis regimens in subgroups of COVID-19 inpatients.Trial registrationThe review protocol was registered in PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews ( CRD42020193369 ).
Project description:High incidence of venous thromboembolic (VTE) events in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has been reported despite pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. We performed prospective bilateral lower extremity ultrasound evaluation of prolonged hospitalized COVID-19 ward patients from our institution without clinical suspicion of deep vein thrombosis (DVT).A total of 102 patient were included in the study. All patients were receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, the majority in intermediate or therapeutic doses. Asymptomatic DVT was detected in 26/102 (25.5%) patients: 22 had distal and four had proximal DVT, six had bilateral leg involvement. Pulmonary embolism was highly prevalent (17/70, 24.3%) but similarly grouped among patients with and without asymptomatic DVT. In total 37.2% of patients included in the study were recognized as having VTE.Asymptomatic DVT events were more common in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors (60% in postmechanically ventilated ICU survivors, 21.2% in ward patients, 22% in high-flow oxygen treated patients; P = 0.031), in patients with higher modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE) VTE risk-score (median 3 vs. 2 points with and without DVT; P = 0.021) and higher body temperature on admission (median 38.7 °C vs. 37.7 °C with and without DVT; P = 0.001). No clear associations with Padua VTE risk score, demographic and other clinical characteristics, intensity of thromboprophylaxis, severity of other COVID-19 symptoms, degree of systemic inflammation or D‑dimers on admission were found (P > 0.05 for all analyses).Systematic ultrasound assessment in prolonged hospitalized severe COVID-19 patients prior to hospital discharge is needed, especially in ICU survivors, to timely recognize and appropriately treat patients with asymptomatic DVT.
Project description:ObjectiveThe pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused devastating morbidity and mortality worldwide. In particular, thromboembolic complications have emerged as a key threat for patients with COVID-19. We assessed our experience with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with COVID-19.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with COVID-19 who had undergone upper or lower extremity venous duplex ultrasonography at an academic health system in New York City from March 3, 2020 to April 12, 2020 with follow-up through May 12, 2020. A cohort of hospitalized patients without COVID-19 (non-COVID-19) who had undergone venous duplex ultrasonography from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 was used for comparison. The primary outcome was DVT. The secondary outcomes included pulmonary embolism, in-hospital mortality, admission to the intensive care unit, and antithrombotic therapy. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify the risk factors for DVT and mortality.ResultsOf 443 patients (COVID-19, n = 188; and non-COVID-19, n = 255) who had undergone venous duplex ultrasonography, the COVID-19 cohort had had a greater incidence of DVT (31% vs 19%; P = .005) than had the non-COVID-19 cohort. The incidence of pulmonary embolism was not significantly different statistically between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts (8% vs 4%; P = .105). The DVT location in the COVID-19 group was more often distal (63% vs 29%; P < .001) and bilateral (15% vs 4%; P < .001). The duplex ultrasound findings had a significant impact on the antithrombotic plan; 42 patients (72%) with COVID-19 in the DVT group had their therapy escalated and 49 (38%) and 3 (2%) had their therapy escalated and deescalated in the non-DVT group, respectively (P < .001). Within the COVID-19 cohort, the D-dimer level was significantly greater in the DVT group at admission (2746 ng/mL vs 1481 ng/mL; P = .004) and at the duplex examination (6068 ng/mL vs 3049 ng/mL; P < .01). On multivariable analysis, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-4.87; P = .035), intensive care unit admission (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 1.02-11.44; P = .046), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.01-30.13; P = .049) were independently associated with DVT.ConclusionsGiven the high incidence of venous thromboembolic events in this population, we support the decision to empirically initiate therapeutic anticoagulation for patients with a low bleeding risk and severe COVID-19 infection. Duplex ultrasonography should be reserved for patients with a high clinical suspicion of venous thromboembolism for whom anticoagulation therapy could result in life-threatening consequences. Further study of patients with COVID-19 is warranted to elucidate the etiology of vascular thromboembolic events and guide the prophylactic and therapeutic interventions for these patients.
Project description:IntroductionSevere SARS-CoV-2 infection induces COVID-19 along with venous thromboembolic occurrences particularly in intensive care units. For non-severe COVID-19 patients affected by neurovascular diseases, the prevalence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is unknown. The aim of our study was to report data obtained after systematic Doppler ultrasound scanning (DUS) of lower limbs in such patients.MethodsBetween March 20 and May 2, 2020, the deep venous system of 13 consecutive patients diagnosed with neurovascular diseases and non-severe COVID-19 was investigated with a systematic bedside DUS.ResultsThirteen patients were enrolled in the study including 9 acute ischaemic strokes, 1 occlusion of the ophthalmic artery, 1 transient ischaemic attack, 1 cerebral venous thrombosis and 1 haemorrhagic stroke. On admission, the median National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score was of 6 (IQR, 0-20). During the first week after admission, and despite thromboprophylaxis, we found a prevalence of 38.5% of asymptomatic calves' DVT (n = 5). One patient developed a symptomatic pulmonary embolism and 2 other patients died during hospitalization. The outcome was positive for the other patients with a discharge median NIHSS score of 1 (IQR, 0-11).Discussion/conclusionDespite thromboprophylaxis, systematic bedside DUS showed a high prevalence (38.5%) of asymptomatic DVT in non-severe COVID-19 patients suffering from a neurovascular disease. In the absence of a reliable marker of DVT, we suggest that this non-invasive investigation could be an interesting tool to monitor peripheral venous thrombotic complications in such patients.
Project description:Isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT) is presumed to be more benign than proximal DVT (PDVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), suggesting a need for different management approaches. This subgroup analysis of the RE-COVERY DVT/PE global, observational study investigated patient characteristics, hospitalization details, and anticoagulant therapy in patients with IDDVT in real-world settings in 34 countries enrolled from January 2016 to May 2017. Data were analyzed descriptively according to the type and location of the index venous thromboembolism (VTE): IDDVT, PDVT ± distal DVT (DDVT), and PE ± DVT. Of the 6,095 eligible patients, 323 with DVT located outside the lower limb and no PE were excluded. Of the remaining 5,772 patients, 17.6% had IDDVT, 39.9% had PDVT ± DDVT, and 42.5% had PE ± DVT. IDDVT patients were younger and had fewer risk factors for VTE than the other groups. Other comorbidities were less frequent in the IDDVT group, except for varicose veins, superficial thrombophlebitis, and venous insufficiency. IDDVT patients were less likely to be diagnosed in an emergency department (22.3 vs. 29.7% for PDVT ± DDVT and 45.4% for PE ± DVT) or hospitalized for VTE (29.2 vs. 48.5% for PDVT ± DDVT and 75.0% for PE ± DVT). At hospital discharge or 14 days after diagnosis (whichever was later), non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants were the most commonly used anticoagulants (55.6% for IDDVT, 54.7% for PDVT ± DDVT, and 52.8% for PE ± DVT). Although differences in patient characteristics, risk factors, and clinical management were identified, anticoagulant treatment of IDDVT was almost equal to that of PDVT or PE. Prospective studies should investigate whether, in a global perspective, this is an appropriate use of anticoagulants.
Project description:BackgroundIsolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT), a disease frequently detected in hospitalized patients, can progress to proximal deep vein thrombosis (PDVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Here, we evaluated the effects of anticoagulation in hospitalized IDDVT patients.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study in our hospital and enrolled hospitalized IDDVT patients diagnosed by compression ultrasonography (CUS) from January to December 2020. Participants were divided into anticoagulation (AC) and non-anticoagulation (non-AC) groups. After propensity score matching (PSM), multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to assess whether anticoagulation was associated with PDVT/PE, and all-cause mortality.ResultsA total of 426 IDDVT inpatients with CUS follow-up were screened from 1502 distal DVT patients and finally enrolled. The median age was 67 years with 51.4% males and 15.5% cancer patients. The median follow-up was 11.6 months. There were 288 and 138 patients treated with or without anticoagulants, respectively. Patients in the non-AC group had less body mass index and more comorbidities. Patients in the AC group were treated with rivaroxaban or dabigatran (52.1%), low molecular weight heparin (42.7%), and warfarin (5.2%). The PSM generated 111 pairs of well-matched IDDVT patients with or without anticoagulation. The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that neither the incidence of PDVT/PE (5.4% vs. 2.7%, log-rank p = 0.313) nor all-cause mortality (27.9% vs. 18.9%, log-rank p = 0.098) was significant different between groups. Anticoagulation was not associated with PDVT/PE and all-cause mortality in the multivariable Cox regression analyses using the matched cohorts. The main risk factors for all-cause mortality were age, malignancy history, BMI, sepsis, heart failure, and white blood cell (WBC) count.ConclusionsIn hospitalized IDDVT patients, the thrombosis extension rate to PDVT/PE was low. Anticoagulation did not reduce the incidence of thrombosis extension of IDDVT and was not associated with all-cause mortality.
Project description:Background Asymptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is an end point frequently used to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in medical patients. Recently, the clinical relevance of asymptomatic DVT has been challenged. Methods and Results The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between asymptomatic proximal DVT and all-cause mortality (ACM) using a cohort analysis of a randomized trial for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in acutely ill medical patients. Patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had an adequate compression ultrasound examination of the legs on either day 10 or day 35 were categorized into 1 of 3 cohorts: no VTE, asymptomatic proximal DVT, or symptomatic DVT. Cox proportional hazards model, with adjustment for significant independent predictors of mortality, were used to compare the incidences of ACM. Of the 7036 patients, 6776 had no VTE, 236 had asymptomatic DVT, and 24 had symptomatic VTE. The incidence of ACM was 4.8% in patients without VTE. Both asymptomatic proximal DVT (mortality, 11.4%; hazard ratio [HR], 2.31; 95% CI, 1.52-3.51; P<0.0001) and symptomatic VTE (mortality, 29.2%; HR, 9.42; 95% CI, 4.18-21.20; P<0.0001) were independently associated with significant increases in ACM. The analysis was post hoc, and ultrasound results were not available for all patients. Adjustment for baseline variables significantly associated with ACM may not fully compensate for differences. Conclusions Asymptomatic proximal DVT is associated with higher ACM than no VTE and remains a relevant end point to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in medical patients. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00571649.
Project description:Background Overall, 30 to 50% of lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) cases are isolated distal DVT (IDDVT). The recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk is unclear, leaving uncertainty over optimal IDDVT treatment. We present data on patients with IDDVT and proximal DVT (PDVT) from the prospective, noninterventional XALIA study of rivaroxaban for acute and extended VTE treatment. Methods Patients aged ≥18 years scheduled to receive ≥3 months' anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or standard anticoagulation were eligible, with follow-up for ≥12 months. We describe baseline characteristics, management strategies, and incidence proportions of VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality in patients with IDDVT or PDVT, with or without distal vein involvement. Findings Overall, 1,004 patients with IDDVT and 3,098 with PDVT were enrolled; 641 (63.8%) and 1,683 (54.3%) received rivaroxaban, respectively. Patients with IDDVT were younger and had lower incidences of renal impairment, cancer, and unprovoked VTE than those with PDVT. On-treatment recurrence incidences for IDDVT versus PDVT were 1.0 versus 2.4% (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29-1.08), and incidences posttreatment cessation were 1.1 versus 2.1% (adjusted HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.32-1.35), respectively. On-treatment major bleeding incidences were 0.9 versus 1.4% and mortality was 0.8 versus 2.2%, respectively. Median treatment duration in patients with IDDVT was shorter than in those with PDVT (102 vs. 192 days, respectively). Interpretation Patients with IDDVT had fewer comorbidities and were more frequently treated with rivaroxaban than those with PDVT. On-treatment and posttreatment recurrences were less frequent in patients with IDDVT. Trial registration number: NCT01619007.