P1691: COMPARISON OF IMPROVE, MODIFIED IMPROVE, IMPROVEDD AND PADUA RISK SCORES FOR VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM PREDICTION IN HOSPITALIZED COVID-19 PATIENTS
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lucijanic M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9430062 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9013703 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In ambulatory patients with solid cancer, routine thromboprophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism is not recommended. Several risk prediction scores to identify cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism have been proposed, but their clinical usefulness remains a matter of debate. We evaluated and directly compared the performance of the Khorana, Vienna, PROTECHT, and CONKO scores in a multinational, prospective cohort study. Patients with advanced cancer were eligible if they were due to undergo chemotherapy or had started chemotherapy in the previous three months. The primary outcome was objectively confirmed symptomatic or incidental deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism during a 6-month follow-up period. A total of 876 patients were enrolled, of whom 260 (30%) had not yet received chemotherapy. Fifty-three patients (6.1%) developed venous thromboembolism. The c-statistics of the scores ranged from 0.50 to 0.57. At the conventional positivity threshold of 3 points, the scores classified 13-34% of patients as high-risk; the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism in these patients ranged from 6.5% (95%CI: 2.8-12) for the Khorana score to 9.6% (95%CI: 6.6-13) for the PROTECHT score. High-risk patients had a significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism when using the Vienna (subhazard ratio 1.7; 95%CI: 1.0-3.1) or PROTECHT (subhazard ratio 2.1; 95%CI: 1.2-3.6) scores. In conclusion, the prediction scores performed poorly in predicting venous thromboembolism in cancer patients. The Vienna CATS and PROTECHT scores appear to discriminate better between low- and high-risk patients, but further improvements are needed before they can be considered for introduction into clinical practice.
| S-EPMC5685240 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: To assess the external validity of the Padua and International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE-VTE) risk assessment models (RAMs) for predicting venous thromboembolism (VTE) within 90 days of admission among hospitalized medical patients in Japan. Materials and Methods: A university hospital cohort comprising 3876 consecutive patients ages ≥15 years admitted to a general internal medicine department between July 2016 and July 2021 was retrospectively analyzed using data extracted from their medical records. Results: A total of 74 VTE events (1.9%), including six cases with pulmonary embolism (0.2%), were observed. Both RAMs had poor discriminative performance (C-index=0.64 for both) and generally underestimated VTE risks. However, recalibrating the IMPROVE-VTE RAM to update the baseline hazard improved the calibration (calibration slope=1.01). Decision curve analysis showed that a management strategy with no prediction model outperformed a clinical management strategy guided by the originally proposed RAMs. Conclusions: Both RAMs require an update to function in this particular setting. Further studies with a larger-sized cohort, including re-estimation of the individual regression coefficients with additional, more context-specific predictors, are needed to create a useful model that would help advance risk-oriented VTE prevention programs.
| S-EPMC10064295 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo study the impact of multiphase quality improvement efforts to enhance appropriate use of chemical and mechanical venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (VTEP) on the rate of hospital-acquired VTE and determine whether efforts have been associated with increased bleeding complications.Patients and methodsAll adult inpatients discharged between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2015, were included in the study. Retrospective interrupted time series analysis compared VTEP performance, VTE outcomes, and unintended consequences (derived from linked administrative and clinical data) across 5 improvement phases: baseline (January 1, 2005-December 31, 2006), paper order set phase (January 1, 2007-February 9, 2009), electronic order set phase (February 10, 2009-December 16, 2009), active reminder phase (December 17, 2009-May 31, 2012), and maintenance phase (June 1, 2012-September 30, 2015).ResultsGuideline VTEP plan adherence at the end of the study period (including documenting contraindications) reached 88.8% (654,138 of 736,384 patient days). Delivery of pharmacological VTEP increased from 43.9% (49,155 of 111,906 patients) to 60.8% (75,784 of 124,676 patients); delivery of mechanical or pharmacological VTEP increased less (65.0% [431,791 of 664,087 patient days] to 67.4% [496,625 of 736,384 patient days]). Mean VTE rates decreased from 4.6 per 1000 hospitalizations (21.7 VTEs per month) at baseline to 4.3 per 1000 hospitalizations (18.0 VTEs per month) during the maintenance phase (P<.001). More than 97% of patients who had development of VTE (534 of 548) received VTEP, but 65.7% (360 of 548) experienced gaps of 1 or more days in VTEP delivery. Measured in-hospital bleeding rates were fairly consistent over the study (4.6% [5,198 of 111,906 patients] at baseline to 5.3% [6,662 of 124,676 patients] during the reminder phase). There was little change in rates of 7-day readmission with bleeding or VTE.ConclusionOur VTEP project improved guideline compliance, increased the proportion of patients receiving VTEP, and was associated with a decrease in VTE. Gaps in VTEP delivery occurred despite protocoled order sets and electronic feedback. Further improvements in VTE may require new approaches.
| S-EPMC7140013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to systemic coagulation activation and thrombotic complications.ObjectivesTo investigate the incidence of objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.MethodsSingle-center cohort study of 198 hospitalized patients with COVID-19.ResultsSeventy-five patients (38%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). At time of data collection, 16 (8%) were still hospitalized and 19% had died. During a median follow-up of 7 days (IQR, 3-13), 39 patients (20%) were diagnosed with VTE of whom 25 (13%) had symptomatic VTE, despite routine thrombosis prophylaxis. The cumulative incidences of VTE at 7, 14 and 21 days were 16% (95% CI, 10-22), 33% (95% CI, 23-43) and 42% (95% CI 30-54) respectively. For symptomatic VTE, these were 10% (95% CI, 5.8-16), 21% (95% CI, 14-30) and 25% (95% CI 16-36). VTE appeared to be associated with death (adjusted HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.02-5.5). The cumulative incidence of VTE was higher in the ICU (26% (95% CI, 17-37), 47% (95% CI, 34-58), and 59% (95% CI, 42-72) at 7, 14 and 21 days) than on the wards (any VTE and symptomatic VTE 5.8% (95% CI, 1.4-15), 9.2% (95% CI, 2.6-21), and 9.2% (2.6-21) at 7, 14, and 21 days).ConclusionsThe observed risk for VTE in COVID-19 is high, particularly in ICU patients, which should lead to a high level of clinical suspicion and low threshold for diagnostic imaging for DVT or PE. Future research should focus on optimal diagnostic and prophylactic strategies to prevent VTE and potentially improve survival.
| S-EPMC7497052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA link between inflammation and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in COVID-19 disease has been suggested pathophysiologically and clinically. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between inflammation and disease outcomes in adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients with VTE.MethodsThis was a retrospective observational study, including quantitative and qualitative data collected from COVID-19 patients hospitalized at the Infectious Diseases Unit (IDU) of the University Hospital of Ioannina, from 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2022. Venous thromboembolism was defined as a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or vascular tree-in-bud in the lungs. The burden of disease, assessed by computed tomography of the lungs (CTBoD), was quantified as the percentage (%) of the affected lung parenchyma. The study outcomes were defined as death, intubation, and length of hospital stay (LoS). A chi-squared test and univariate logistic regression analyses were performed in IBM SPSS 28.0.ResultsAfter propensity score matching, the final study cohort included 532 patients. VTE was found in 11.2% of the total population. In patients with VTE, we found that lymphocytopenia and a high neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio were associated with an increased risk of intubation and death, respectively. Similarly, CTBoD > 50% was associated with a higher risk of intubation and death in this group of patients. The triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index was also linked to worse outcomes.ConclusionsInflammatory indices were associated with VTE. Lymphocytopenia and an increased neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio negatively impacted the disease's prognosis and outcomes. Whether these indices unfavorably affect outcomes in COVID-19-associated VTE must be further evaluated.
| S-EPMC10670045 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The performance of validated bleeding risk scores in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) could be different depending on the time after index event or the site of bleeding. In this study we compared the "classic" Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) score and the more recently developed VTE-BLEED score for the prediction of major bleeding in patients under anticoagulant therapy in different time intervals after VTE diagnosis. Out of 82,239 patients with acute VTE, the proportion of high-risk patients according to the RIETE and VTE-BLEED scores was 7.1 and 62.3%, respectively. The performance of both scores across the different study periods (first 30 days after VTE diagnosis, days 31-90, days 91-180, and days 181-360) was similar, with areas under the receiving operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC) ranging between 0.69 and 0.72. However, the positive predictive values were low, ranging between 0.6 and 3.9 (better for early major bleeding than for later periods). A sensitivity analysis limited to patients with unprovoked VTE showed comparable results. Both scores showed a trend toward a better prediction of extracranial than intracranial major bleeding, the RIETE score resulting more useful for early extracranial bleeding and the VTE-BLEED for late intracranial hemorrhages. Our study reveals that the usefulness of available bleeding scores may vary depending on the characteristics of the patient population and the time frame evaluated. Dynamic scores could be more useful for this purpose.
| S-EPMC8459175 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMultiple guidelines recommend assessment of bleeding and venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in adult medical inpatients to inform prevention strategies. There is no agreed-upon method for VTE and bleeding risk assessment.ObjectivesTo validate the International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE) VTE and bleeding risk scores in an independent population.MethodsIn this retrospective study, we calculated the IMPROVE VTE and bleeding risk scores in medical inpatients admitted between 2010 and 2019 at the University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMMC). Patients were followed for in-hospital bleeding events while hospitalized and VTE events while hospitalized and for 3 months after discharge. We assessed calibration of the risk models by comparing the observed incidence of events in the UVMMC and IMPROVE populations across the published risk categories. We also assessed performance of the IMPROVE risk factors after refitting the models in the UVMMC population. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).ResultsVTE occurred in 270 (1.1%) of 23,873 admissions, with 92 (34%) occurring during admission, and bleeding occurred in 712 (4.7%) of 15,240 admissions. When the IMPROVE-VTE risk factors were refitted to the UVMMC data, the AUC was 0.64. When the IMPROVE bleeding risk factors were refitted to the UVMMC data, the AUC was 0.67. The IMPROVE-VTE score tended to overestimate risk at higher scores, and the IMPROVE bleeding score underestimated risk at lower scores and overestimated risk at higher scores.ConclusionWhile the refitted IMPROVE VTE and bleeding risk scores had reasonable model fit, the scores were poorly calibrated and did not reliably identify or differentiate patients at risk for VTE and bleeding. Different methods are needed for risk assessment of medical inpatients for VTE and bleeding risk.
| S-EPMC11215414 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of COVID-19. It is not well understood how hospitals have managed VTE prevention and the effect of prevention strategies on mortality.ObjectiveTo characterize frequency, variation across hospitals, and change over time in VTE prophylaxis and treatment-dose anticoagulation in patients hospitalized for COVID-19, as well as the association of anticoagulation strategies with in-hospital and 60-day mortality.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 used a pseudorandom sample from 30 US hospitals in the state of Michigan participating in a collaborative quality initiative. Data analyzed were from patients hospitalized between March 7, 2020, and June 17, 2020. Data were analyzed through March 2021.ExposuresNonadherence to VTE prophylaxis (defined as missing ≥2 days of VTE prophylaxis) and receipt of treatment-dose or prophylactic-dose anticoagulants vs no anticoagulation during hospitalization.Main outcomes and measuresThe effect of nonadherence and anticoagulation strategies on in-hospital and 60-day mortality was assessed using multinomial logit models with inverse probability of treatment weighting.ResultsOf a total 1351 patients with COVID-19 included (median [IQR] age, 64 [52-75] years; 47.7% women, 48.9% Black patients), only 18 (1.3%) had a confirmed VTE, and 219 (16.2%) received treatment-dose anticoagulation. Use of treatment-dose anticoagulation without imaging ranged from 0% to 29% across hospitals and increased over time (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.31-1.61 per week). Of 1127 patients who ever received anticoagulation, 392 (34.8%) missed 2 or more days of prophylaxis. Missed prophylaxis varied from 11% to 61% across hospitals and decreased markedly over time (aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.97 per week). VTE nonadherence was associated with higher 60-day (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.03-1.67) but not in-hospital mortality (aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03). Receiving any dose of anticoagulation (vs no anticoagulation) was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (only prophylactic dose: aHR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.26-0.52; any treatment dose: aHR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.25-0.58). However, only the prophylactic dose of anticoagulation remained associated with lower mortality at 60 days (prophylactic dose: aHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90; treatment dose: aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.63-1.35).Conclusions and relevanceThis large, multicenter cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, found evidence of rapid dissemination and implementation of anticoagulation strategies, including use of treatment-dose anticoagulation. As only prophylactic-dose anticoagulation was associated with lower 60-day mortality, prophylactic dosing strategies may be optimal for patients hospitalized with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8196344 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the association between anticoagulant dosing intensity in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected patients and its outcomes on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and all-cause mortality.MethodsThis is a retrospective observational study that examined different anticoagulation regimens among COVID-19 patients for prophylaxis of VTE. Primary outcomes of the study were VTE incidence and all-cause mortality for patients receiving prophylaxis-intensity (PPX) and therapeutic-intensity (TX) anticoagulation. Secondary outcomes were incidence of hemorrhagic events and hospital length of stay. Patients were matched (1:1) based on age and Charlson comorbidity score. Sub-group analyses evaluated outcomes within critically ill patients, between specific anticoagulant agents and comorbid conditions.ResultsThe primary outcome of VTE occurred in six patients within the prophylactic dose group and eight patients in the therapeutic-intensity dose group (risk ratio (RR): 2.02 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.7 - 5.2); P = 0.2). Bleeding occurred in 15 (11%) patients in the prophylactic group and 27 (19%) patients in the therapeutic group (RR: 0.5 (95% CI: 0.3 - 1.0); P < 0.049). Hospital length of stay was shorter by 4 days in those treated with prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation (P = 0.003). Intensive care unit admission and ventilation were negatively correlated with mortality in a multivariate analysis.ConclusionsAmong hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the use of therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation did not show any benefits in reducing the occurrence of VTE. An increase in mortality and in the incidence of hemorrhagic events was statistically significant in the therapeutic-intensity group. Future prospective studies are warranted to evaluate anticoagulation therapy in COVID-19 infected patients.
| S-EPMC9635799 | biostudies-literature