topics

3/10/26

ABSTRACT

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of both morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Venous thromboembolism, which includes both deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, affects a sizable portion of patients with malignancy and can have potentially life threatening complications. Accurate assessment of risk as well as diagnosis and treatment of this process is paramount to preventing death in this high risk population. Various risk models predictive of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer have been developed, and knowledge of these rubrics is essential for the treating oncologist. Subgroups of particular interest are inpatients receiving chemotherapy, postoperative patients after surgical debulking, and patients undergoing radiotherapy. Numerous newer drugs have become available for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer who are at high risk of developing the disease. These include the class of drugs called direct oral anticoagulants, (DOACs) which do not require the same monitoring that other modalities have previously required and are taken by mouth, preventing the discomfort associated with subcutaneous strategies. The appropriate risk stratification and intervention to prevent venous thromboembolism are vital to the treatment of patients with cancer.

PMID:37263632 | DOI:10.1136/bmj-2022-072715

10:39

Photo

Not included, change data exporting settings to download.

1200×1200, 39.0 KB

10:39

In reply to this message

PubMed articles on: Cancer & VTE/PE

Accuracy of the Physicians' Intuitive Risk Estimation in the Diagnostic Management of Pulmonary Embolism: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

J Thromb Haemost. 2023 May 30:S1538-7836(23)00438-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jtha.2023.05.023. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In patients clinically suspected of pulmonary embolism (PE), physicians often rely on an intuitive estimation ('gestalt') of PE presence. Although shown to be predictive, gestalt is criticized for its assumed variation across physicians and lack of standardization.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of gestalt in diagnosing PE and gain insight into its possible variation.

METHODS: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis including patients suspected of PE. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of gestalt for diagnosing PE, quantified as a risk ratio (RR) between gestalt and PE from a two-stage random-effect log-binomial meta-analysis regression as well as gestalts' sensitivity and specificity. Variability of these measures was explored across different healthcare settings, publication period, PE prevalence, patient subgroups (sex, heart failure, chronic lung disease, and items of the Wells score other than gestalt), and age.

RESULTS: We analysed 20,770 patients suspected of PE from 16 original studies. The prevalence of PE in patients with and without a positive gestalt was 28.8% versus 9.1%, respectively. The overall RR was 3.02 (95%CI 2.35, 3.87) and overall sensitivity and specificity were 74% (95%CI 68-79%) and 61% (95%CI 53-68%). Although variation was observed across individual studies (I2-90.63%), diagnostic accuracy was consistent across all subgroups and healthcare settings.

CONCLUSIONS: A positive gestalt was associated with a threefold increased risk of PE in suspected patients. Although variation was observed across studies, the RR of gestalt was similar across prespecified subgroups and healthcare settings, exemplifying its diagnostic value for all patients suspected of PE.

PMID:37263381 | DOI:10.1016/j.jtha.2023.05.023