↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Direct oral anticoagulants for extended thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients: meta-analysis and risk/benefit assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Blood Medicine, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Direct oral anticoagulants for extended thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients: meta-analysis and risk/benefit assessment
Published in
Journal of Blood Medicine, February 2018
DOI 10.2147/jbm.s149202
Pubmed ID
Authors

Majed S Al Yami, Sawsan Kurdi, Ivo Abraham

Abstract

Standard-duration (7-10 days) thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin, low dose unfractionated heparin, or fondaparinux in hospitalized medically ill patients is associated with ~50% reduction in venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. However, these patients remain at high risk for VTE post-discharge. The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) apixaban, rivaroxaban and betrixaban have been evaluated for extended-duration (30-42 days) thromboprophylaxis in this population. We review the efficacy and safety results from the 3 pivotal trials of extended-duration DOAC thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients. We performed a meta-analysis of these pivotal trials focusing on 6 VTE (efficacy) and three bleeding outcomes (safety). These results were integrated into a quantitative risk/benefit assessment. The trials evaluating extended-duration DOAC thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients failed to establish clear efficacy and/or safety signals for each agent. Our meta-analysis shows that, as a class, DOACs have selective and partial extended-duration prophylactic activity in preventing VTE events. However, this is associated with a marked increase in the risk of various bleeding events. The risk/benefit analyses fail to show a consistent net clinical benefit of extended-duration DOAC prophylaxis in medically ill patients. At this time, the evidence of safe and effective extended-duration thromboprophylaxis with DOACs in this population is inconclusive.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Lecturer 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 39%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Unknown 10 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,466,701
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Blood Medicine
#246
of 293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#377,647
of 440,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Blood Medicine
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.