Deferring diagnostic evaluation of suspected deep vein thrombosis using direct oral anticoagulant or low-molecular-weight heparin as a single dose anticoagulant: A prospective real-world study in a regionwide care pathway.

BACKGROUND: Patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis (DVT) are typically referred to the emergency department for immediate evaluation. To enhance efficiency, our hospital implemented a regional, general practitioner (GP)-driven DVT care pathway, deferring diagnostic evaluation to a scheduled outpatient DVT clinic appointment the following day. Patients receive a single dose anticoagulant from their GP to prevent thrombosis progression while awaiting diagnostic workup. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the safety and patient preferences regarding the DVT care pathway and the type of single dose anticoagulant (low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs. direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the DVT care pathway between June 2021 and July 2023 were eligible. Until July 2022, LMWH was administered, and thereafter, the protocol recommended DOAC as the single dose anticoagulant. Patients completed questionnaires, incorporating patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs/PREMs), during their DVT clinic visit and after five days. The primary endpoint was bleeding events within 72 h of receiving the single dose anticoagulant. RESULTS: Of 460 included patients, 229 received LMWH and 231 received DOAC as the single dose anticoagulant. DVT was confirmed in 24.8 % of patients. No major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding were reported. LMWH was associated with more minor bleedings (22.3 % vs. DOAC 13.4 %), primarily attributed to injection site hematomas. Patients reported high satisfaction with the DVT care pathway (96.5 %) and generally preferred DOAC over LMWH. CONCLUSION: Deferring diagnostic evaluation for DVT using a single dose of either LMWH or DOAC in a real-world population is deemed safe. Considering practical advantages, patient preferences, and fewer skin hematomas, we favor DOACs as the single dose anticoagulant in this care pathway.

Deferring diagnostic evaluation for suspected deep venous thrombosis using a single dose of anticoagulant: Real-world data from a regionwide care pathway.

BACKGROUND: Patients with suspected deep venous thrombosis (DVT) are typically referred to the emergency department (ED) for immediate evaluation. However, this often contributes to ED overcrowding and necessitates round-the-clock sonographic examinations. Therefore, we implemented a regionwide care pathway for deferring diagnostic workup of suspected DVT until the following day. Patients receive a single anticoagulant dose from their general practitioner (GP) to prevent progression of DVT in the interval between referral and diagnostic evaluation. The next day, patients undergo comprehensive evaluation at our outpatient DVT clinic, including venous ultrasound. This retrospective study aims to provide real-world data on the safety of this care pathway regarding the occurrence of bleeding complications and pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: We included all GP-referred patients with suspected DVT in 2018 and 2019. Patients with absolute contraindications to deferred evaluation or anticoagulation were excluded. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of bleeding complications. Secondary endpoints included PE events and all-cause mortality within seven days following DVT evaluation. RESULTS: Among 1,024 included patients, DVT was confirmed in 238 patients (23.2%) and superficial thrombophlebitis in 98 patients (9.6%). No bleeding events were recorded in patients in whom DVT was ruled out. PE was confirmed in eight patients on the same day as DVT evaluation (0.8%, 95%CI 0.4-1.6) and in six patients within seven days following DVT evaluation (0.6%, 0.2-1.3%). No deaths occurred during this timeframe. CONCLUSION: This real-world study observed a very low incidence of bleeding complications and PE events, indicating that this care pathway of deferred DVT workup is safe and may offer a more streamlined diagnostic approach for patients with suspected DVT.

[Prevalence and drug treatment of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and a very high risk of cardiovascular disease]. / Diabetes type 2 én een hoog risico op hart- en vaatziekten.

OBJECTIVE: Dutch diabetes guidelines have been updated to incorporate specific therapies with cardiovascular and kidney outcomes benefit in type 2 diabetes patients (T2D) at very high risk for cardiorenal complications. This is part of a comprehensive approach to reduce the risk of diabetes-related complications, including management of glycemia, blood pressure, and lipids. The current study examines the prevalence of T2D at very high cardiorenal risk and the deployment of evidence-based approaches to lower this risk. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, observational study. METHOD: A representative population) with T2D in primary care (N= 64,224) was selected from the PHARMO Data Network. A very high risk of CVD was defined as: 1) established CVD, 2) CKD with (very) high cardiovascular risk and 3) heart failure. Drug treatment was determined according to prescriptions in 2019. RESULTS: 25,901 subjects with T2D had a very high risk of CVD (mean age 73.3 years; 42% female). Established CVD, CKD with (very) high cardiovascular risk, and heart failure were observed in 82%, 26% and 22% of patients, respectively. Low-dose salicylates, lipid-lowering and blood pressure-lowering medication were used by 39%, 70% and 69%, respectively. Glucose-lowering medication use included metformin (53%), sulfonylurea-derivatives (24%), and insulin (19%). 2% of the population used a SGLT2 inhibitor or GLP1-receptor agonist. CONCLUSION: 40% of people with DM2 have a very high risk of CVD. Although our findings reflect the recommendations of the previous treatment guideline for DM2, they also show that the new guideline has significant implications for the treatment of a large proportion of people with DM2.