Literature DB >> 10853685

Risk factor assessment in the management of patients with suspected deep venous thrombosis.

G D Motykie1, J A Caprini, J I Arcelus, L P Zebala, C E Lee, N M Finke, A Tamhane, J J Reyna.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the prevalence of thrombosis risk factors in a group of patients undergoing venous duplex scanning (VDS) and to design a risk factor stratification model with the ability to improve the diagnostic yield of VDS.
METHODS: Risk factor assessment and VDS were performed on 1,000 patients with clinically suspected lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and patients were divided into two groups based upon the outcome of their scan: those with and those without confirmed DVT. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed in order to determine the significance of each risk factor in relation to having a confirmed DVT.
RESULTS: There were 181 patients (18.1%) with confirmed DVT. A prior history of DVT/pulmonary embolism, malignancy, prior immobilization, and age over 70 were the most important risk factors associated with having a DVT confirmed on VDS. A novel risk factor stratification model was created utilizing the odds ratios of those factors found to be significant and the prevalence of DVT was found to be 92.4% in the high risk category, 11.5% in the moderate risk category, and 3.2% in the low risk category using this model.
CONCLUSIONS: Venous duplex scanning is established as the screening test of choice when one suspects the diagnosis of DVT despite the significant cost of performing and interpreting the test. We suggest that a better clinical model utilizing risk factor assessment may be the key to increasing the yield rate and cost-effectiveness of VDS by excluding low-risk patients from undergoing unnecessary testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10853685

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Angiol        ISSN: 0392-9590            Impact factor:   2.789


  6 in total

Review 1.  Risk-assessment algorithm and recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in medical patients.

Authors:  Ana T Rocha; Edison F Paiva; Arnaldo Lichtenstein; Rodolfo Milani; Cyrillo Filho Cavalheiro; Francisco H Maffei
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2007

Review 2.  A systematic review of mobility/immobility in thromboembolism risk assessment models for hospitalized patients.

Authors:  Fan Ye; Carolyn Stalvey; Matheen A Khuddus; David E Winchester; Hale Z Toklu; Joseph J Mazza; Steven H Yale
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.300

3.  Effectiveness and safety of expanded perioperative thromboprophylaxis in complex gynecologic surgery.

Authors:  Bradley R Corr; Andrea M Winter; Mary D Sammel; Christina S Chu; Brian F Gage; Andrea R Hagemann
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  The effect of a provider-enhanced clinical decision support tool for guiding venous thromboembolism pharmacoprophylaxis in low-risk patients.

Authors:  Michael J MaCauley; John W Showalter; Michael J Beck; Cynthia H Chuang
Journal:  Hosp Pract (1995)       Date:  2012-08

5.  Perspective on the hospital incidence rate of deep venous coagulopathy: Clinical and biochemical diagnostic markers.

Authors:  Alireza Khosravi; Mojgan Gharipour; Morteza Abdar Isfahani; Hamid Mohajeri; Mohammad Saadatnia; Farshad Roghani; Shahin Shirani; Arsalan Khaledifar
Journal:  Adv Biomed Res       Date:  2014-12-12

6.  Traumatic deep vein thrombosis in a soccer player: A case study.

Authors:  Paul S Echlin; Ross Eg Upshur; Douglas B McKeag; Harsha P Jayatilake
Journal:  Thromb J       Date:  2004-10-14
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.