Thromb Haemostasis
-
Review Meta Analysis
Accuracy of emergency physician-performed ultrasonography in the diagnosis of deep-vein thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Duplex ultrasound is the first-line diagnostic test for detecting lower limb deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) but it is time consuming, requires patient transport, and cannot be interpreted by most physicians. The accuracy of emergency physician-performed ultrasound (EPPU) for the diagnosis of DVT, when performed at the bedside, is unclear. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature, aiming to provide reliable data on the accuracy of EPPU in the diagnosis of DVT. ⋯ Using the bivariate approach, the weighted mean sensitivity of EPPU compared to the reference imaging test was 96.1% (95%CI 90.6-98.5%), and with a weighted mean specificity of 96.8% (95%CI:94.6-98.1%). Our findings suggest that EPPU may be useful in the management of patients with suspected DVT. Future prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
-
Review
Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients - risk scores and recent randomised controlled trials.
Cancer patients are at increased risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Guidelines recommend routine thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised acutely ill cancer patients and in myeloma patients receiving combination treatments including thalidomide or lenalidomide. Currently, thromboprophylaxis is not recommended in cancer outpatients. ⋯ However, VTE incidence rates were low. To date, no data is available from interventional studies applying thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients categorised into high-risk groups on the basis of risk assessment with scores. From the available literature we conclude that risk assessment for VTE is feasible in cancer patients; however, interventional studies to investigate the safety and efficacy of thromboprophylaxis in a high risk cancer population have yet to be performed.
-
Review
Management consensus guidance for the use of rivaroxaban--an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor.
A number of novel oral anticoagulants that directly target factor Xa or thrombin have been developed in recent years. Rivaroxaban and apixaban (direct factor Xa inhibitors) and dabigatran etexilate (a direct thrombin inhibitor) have shown considerable promise in large-scale, randomised clinical studies for the management of thromboembolic disorders, and have been approved for clinical use in specific indications. ⋯ Based on the clinical trial data for rivaroxaban, feedback on its use in clinical practice and the authors' experience with the use of rivaroxaban, practical guidance for the use of rivaroxaban in special patient populations and specific clinical situations is provided. Although most recommendations are in line with the European summary of product characteristics for the approved indications, additional and, in several areas, different recommendations are given based on review of the literature and the authors' clinical experience.
-
Review Comparative Study
Home-monitoring of oral anticoagulation vs. dabigatran. An indirect comparison.
Oral anticoagulation with vitamin k antagonists (VKAs) requires regular testing and dose adjustment. Home-monitoring (self-testing or self-management) is more effective than usual management. Dabigatran, does not require dose-adjustment and appears to be more effective at reducing the risk of stroke with similar risks of bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). ⋯ In conclusion, the indirect comparison of home monitoring of oral anticoagulation with dabigatran suggests that the treatments have similar impact on thrombosis, bleeding and death. However, the confidence in the estimate of effect is low to very low. Our analyses contrast with the available comparison of dabigatran with conventional warfarin monitoring.
-
Review Comparative Study
An indirect comparison of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban for atrial fibrillation.
New oral anticoagulant drugs are emerging as alternatives to warfarin for the prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Two agents are direct factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban and apixaban), and the third is a direct thrombin inhibitor (dabigatran). They have been separately compared to warfarin in large randomised trials. ⋯ In conclusion, the available data indicate no significant difference in efficacy between dabigatran 150 mg and apixaban for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. It appears however that apixaban is associated with less major bleeding than dabigatran 150 mg or rivaroxaban and that rivaroxaban is less effective than dabigatran 150 mg in preventing stroke or systemic embolism. Such an indirect comparison should be used only to generate hypotheses which need to be tested in a dedicated randomised trial comparing the three drugs directly.