Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 341
Filter
1.
J Biomed Inform ; 156: 104681, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38960273

ABSTRACT

The multimorbidity problem involves the identification and mitigation of adverse interactions that occur when multiple computer interpretable guidelines are applied concurrently to develop a treatment plan for a patient diagnosed with multiple diseases. Solving this problem requires decision support approaches which are difficult to comprehend for physicians. As such, the rationale for treatment plans generated by these approaches needs to be provided. OBJECTIVE: To develop an explainability component for an automated planning-based approach to the multimorbidity problem, and to assess the fidelity and interpretability of generated explanations using a clinical case study. METHODS: The explainability component leverages the task-network model for representing computer interpretable guidelines. It generates post-hoc explanations composed of three aspects that answer why specific clinical actions are in a treatment plan, why specific revisions were applied, and how factors like medication cost, patient's adherence, etc. influence the selection of specific actions. The explainability component is implemented as part of MitPlan, where we revised our planning-based approach to support explainability. We developed an evaluation instrument based on the system causability scale and other vetted surveys to evaluate the fidelity and interpretability of its explanations using a two dimensional comparison study design. RESULTS: The explainability component was implemented for MitPlan and tested in the context of a clinical case study. The fidelity and interpretability of the generated explanations were assessed using a physician-focused evaluation study involving 21 participants from two different specialties and two levels of experience. Results show that explanations provided by the explainability component in MitPlan are of acceptable fidelity and interpretability, and that the clinical justification of the actions in a treatment plan is important to physicians. CONCLUSION: We created an explainability component that enriches an automated planning-based approach to solving the multimorbidity problem with meaningful explanations for actions in a treatment plan. This component relies on the task-network model to represent computer interpretable guidelines and as such can be ported to other approaches that also use the task-network model representation. Our evaluation study demonstrated that explanations that support a physician's understanding of the clinical reasons for the actions in a treatment plan are useful and important.


Subject(s)
Multimorbidity , Humans , Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Patient Care Planning
3.
JACC Adv ; 3(3): 100780, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38938844

ABSTRACT

Background: Clinical trials suggest that therapeutic-dose heparin may prevent critical illness and vascular complications due to COVID-19, but knowledge gaps exist regarding the efficacy of therapeutic heparin including its comparative effect relative to intermediate-dose anticoagulation. Objectives: The authors performed 2 complementary secondary analyses of a completed randomized clinical trial: 1) a prespecified per-protocol analysis; and 2) an exploratory dose-based analysis to compare the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin with low- and intermediate-dose heparin. Methods: Patients who received initial anticoagulation dosed consistently with randomization were included. The primary outcome was organ support-free days (OSFDs), a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support through day 21. Results: Among 2,860 participants, 1,761 (92.8%) noncritically ill and 857 (89.1%) critically ill patients were treated per-protocol. Among noncritically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic-dose heparin improved OSFDs as compared with usual care was 99.3% (median adjusted OR: 1.36; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.07-1.74). Therapeutic heparin had a high posterior probability of efficacy relative to both low- (94.6%; adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CrI: 0.95-1.64) and intermediate- (99.8%; adjusted OR: 1.80; 95% CrI: 1.22-2.62) dose thromboprophylaxis. Among critically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic heparin improved outcomes was low. Conclusions: Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were randomized to and initially received therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, heparin, compared with usual care, was associated with improved OSFDs, a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support. Therapeutic heparin appeared superior to both low- and intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis.

4.
Thromb Res ; 240: 109057, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38875846

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) is common in patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT). It is unclear if different types of anticoagulant therapies (e.g. vitamin K antagonists (VKA), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)) are associated with different risks of PTS. We sought to assess the incidence rates of PTS development following a proximal DVT of the lower extremity managed with different types of anticoagulation regimens. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed, from inception to June 2023 was performed. The primary outcome was development of PTS. The secondary outcomes included severe PTS, venous ulcers, and major bleeding. Incidence rates were pooled using the random effects model and expressed as event per 100 patient-years with its associated 95 % confidence intervals (CI) using R software. RESULTS: A total of 21 (4342 patients) articles were included in the analysis. The adjusted pooled incidence of PTS was 15.1 (95 % CI: 8.7 to 26.1), 18.2 (95 % CI: 9.4 to 35.1) and 24.6 (95 % CI: 9.2 to 65.5) per 100 patient-years patients managed with VKA, DOAC and LMWH, respectively. The adjusted pooled incidence of severe PTS was 5.1 (95 % CI: 2.6 to 10.0) and 0.2 (95 % CI: 0.01 to 2.7) per 100 patient-years for VKAs and DOACs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The development of PTS is common in patients with proximal lower extremity DVT. The incidence rates of PTS seem to be similar across the different anticoagulation regimens, but severe PTS may be lower among patients receiving a DOAC.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants , Postthrombotic Syndrome , Venous Thrombosis , Humans , Postthrombotic Syndrome/etiology , Postthrombotic Syndrome/epidemiology , Postthrombotic Syndrome/prevention & control , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Venous Thrombosis/epidemiology , Venous Thrombosis/drug therapy , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Risk Factors , Incidence
5.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(12)2024 Jun 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38927943

ABSTRACT

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of arterial thromboembolic disease due to the presence of risk factors common to both the development of cancer and arterial thrombosis, the cancer itself, and the treatments provided to treat cancer. We review here the epidemiology and pathophysiology of arterial thromboembolic disease in cancer, along with its prevention and treatment strategies. We also propose a generalized approach for the management of arterial thromboembolic disease in this patient population.

6.
J Thromb Haemost ; 2024 Jun 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38866248

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Guidelines suggest indefinite anticoagulation after unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) unless the bleeding risk is high, yet there is no consistent guidance on assessing bleeding risk. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of 5 bleeding risk tools (RIETE, VTE-BLEED, CHAP, VTE-PREDICT, and ABC-Bleeding). METHODS: PLATO-VTE, a prospective cohort study, included patients aged ≥40 years with a first unprovoked VTE. Risk estimates were calculated at VTE diagnosis and after 3 months of treatment. Primary outcome was clinically relevant bleeding, as per International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria, during 24-month follow-up. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Patients were classified as having a "high risk" and "non-high risk" of bleeding according to predefined thresholds; bleeding risk in both groups was compared by hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: Of 514 patients, 38 (7.4%) had an on-treatment bleeding. AUROCs were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.48-0.68) for ABC-Bleeding, 0.56 (95% CI, 0.46-0.66) for RIETE, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.43-0.64) for CHAP, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.41-0.59) for VTE-BLEED, and 0.50 (95% CI, 0.40-0.60) for VTE-PREDICT. The proportion of high-risk patients ranged from 1.4% with RIETE to 36.9% with VTE-BLEED. The bleeding incidence in the high-risk groups ranged from 0% with RIETE to 13.0% with ABC-Bleeding, and in the non-high-risk groups, it varied from 7.7% with ABC-Bleeding to 9.6% with RIETE. HRs ranged from 0.93 (95% CI, 0.46-1.9) for VTE-BLEED to 1.67 (95% CI, 0.86-3.2) for ABC-Bleeding. Recalibration at 3-month follow-up did not alter the results. CONCLUSION: In this cohort, discrimination of currently available bleeding risk tools was poor. These data do not support their use in patients with unprovoked VTE.

7.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38735015

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Treating cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT) with anticoagulation prevents recurrent venous thromboembolism (rVTE), but increases bleeding risk. OBJECTIVES: To compare incidence of rVTE, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality for rivaroxaban versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with CAT. METHODS: We developed a cohort study using Swedish national registers 2013-2019. Patients with CAT (venous thromboembolism within 6 months of cancer diagnosis) were included. Those with other indications or with high bleeding risk cancers were excluded (according to guidelines). Follow-up was from index-CAT until outcome, death, emigration, or end of study. Incidence rates (IR) per 1000 person-years with 95% confidence interval (CI) and propensity score overlap-weighted hazard ratios (HRs) for rivaroxaban versus LMWH were estimated. RESULTS: We included 283 patients on rivaroxaban and 5181 on LMWH. The IR for rVTE was 68.7 (95% CI 40.0-109.9) for rivaroxaban, compared with 91.6 (95% CI 81.9-102.0) for LMWH, with adjusted HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.43-1.35). The IR for major bleeding was 23.5 (95% CI 8.6-51.1) for rivaroxaban versus 49.2 (95% CI 42.3-56.9) for LMWH, with adjusted HR 0.62 (95% CI 0.26-1.49). The IR for all-cause mortality was 146.8 (95% CI 103.9-201.5) for rivaroxaban and 565.6 (95% CI 541.8-590.2) for LMWH with adjusted HR 0.48 (95% CI 0.34-0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban performed similarly to LMWH for patients with CAT for rVTE and major bleeding. An all-cause mortality benefit was observed for rivaroxaban which potentially may be attributed to residual confounding. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05150938 (Registered 9 December 2021).

8.
Thromb Res ; 239: 109037, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38781706

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 10 % of all diagnosed pulmonary embolism are isolated to the subsegmental vessels. The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with an acute subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) managed with or without anticoagulant therapy remains poorly understood. METHODS: This is an observational cohort study including consecutive adult patients diagnosed with acute isolated SSPE between June 01, 2019, and August 31, 2022. We excluded patients with a concomitant diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis and those who had an indication for long-term anticoagulation. The primary outcome was objectively confirmed recurrent VTE. RESULTS: Overall, 118 patients with acute SSPE were included in the analysis. The mean (± standard deviation [SD]) age of the participants was 59 ± 17 years and 44 % of them had active cancer. Mean (±SD) duration of follow-up was 438 ± 426 days. Seventy-seven patients (65 %) were initially treated with anticoagulation, whereas 41 patients (35 %) were not. Of the 77 patients receiving anticoagulant therapy, 23 (30 %) received extended-duration anticoagulation (beyond 3 months) for secondary prevention. Overall, recurrent VTE events occurred in 6/118 (5 %, 95 % CI 2.4 to 10.7) patients. Four events (4/77 = 5.2 %, 95 % CI 2.0 to 12.6) occurred in initially treated patients. Two recurrent VTE occurred in patients initially left untreated (2/41 = 4.9 %, 95 % CI 1.4 to 16.1). Half of the recurrent VTE occurred in patients with active cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients diagnosed with an acute SSPE received anticoagulation. The incidence of recurrent VTE detected over time was relatively high, especially in patients with cancer.


Subject(s)
Hemorrhage , Pulmonary Embolism , Recurrence , Venous Thromboembolism , Humans , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Pulmonary Embolism/drug therapy , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Middle Aged , Male , Female , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Hemorrhage/etiology , Risk Factors , Aged , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Adult , Acute Disease
10.
Pol Arch Intern Med ; 134(6)2024 06 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38661514

ABSTRACT

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in ambulatory cancer patients receiving anticancer therapies. Many patient-, cancer-, and treatment­related factors along with specific biomarkers can be associated with an increased risk of VTE in patients with cancer. Risk assessment models, such as the Khorana score, serve as valuable tools to aid in the identification of patients with cancer who are at high risk of VTE. Two randomized controlled trials have evaluated the efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis with low­dose direct oral anticoagulants, apixaban and rivaroxaban, to reduce the risk of VTE in ambulatory patients with cancer who are at intermediate to high risk of VTE identified by the Khorana score. This narrative review summarizes the literature on the risk factors and risk assessment process for VTE, and the use of primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients. We also outline important practical considerations for initiating primary thromboprophylaxis in this population.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants , Neoplasms , Venous Thromboembolism , Humans , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Primary Prevention , Female , Risk Assessment , Male , Risk Factors , Ambulatory Care , Rivaroxaban/therapeutic use , Pyrazoles , Pyridones
11.
Curr Cardiol Rep ; 26(6): 601-622, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38625456

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Invasive cardiologists are exposed to large amounts of ionizing radiation. This review aims to summarize the main occupational risks in a radiation-exposed cardiology practice. RECENT FINDINGS: We carried out a literature review on the subject. The studies reviewed allowed us to list six main health risk categories possibly associated with radiation exposure among cardiologists: deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and biochemical damages; cancers; ocular manifestations; olfaction, vascular, and neuropsychological alterations; musculoskeletal problems; and reproductive risks. Our descriptive analysis demonstrates higher risks of DNA damage and lens opacities among radiation-exposed cardiology staff. Surveys and questionnaires have demonstrated a higher risk of musculoskeletal disease in exposed workers. Studies reported no difference in cancer frequency between radiation-exposed workers and controls. Changes in olfactory performance, neuropsychological aspects, and vascular changes have also been reported. Limited literature supports the security of continuing radiation-exposed work during pregnancy. Therefore, there is an urgent need to increase knowledge of the occupational risks of radiation exposure and to adopt technologies to reduce them.


Subject(s)
Cardiologists , Occupational Exposure , Radiation Exposure , Humans , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Radiation Exposure/adverse effects , Radiation Injuries/etiology , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Radiation, Ionizing , Risk Factors , DNA Damage/radiation effects
13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38548736

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Trauma patients are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis summarizing the association between prognostic factors and the occurrence of VTE following traumatic injury. METHODS: We searched the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from inception to August 2023. We identified studies reporting confounding adjusted associations between patient, injury or post-injury care factors and risk of VTE. We performed meta-analyses of odds ratios (ORs) using the random effects method and assessed individual study risk of bias using the QUIPS tool. RESULTS: We included 31 studies involving 1,981,946 patients. Studies were predominantly observational cohorts from North America. Factors with moderate or higher certainty of association with increased risk of VTE include older age, obesity, male sex, higher injury severity score, pelvic injury, lower extremity injury, spinal injury, delayed VTE prophylaxis, need for surgery and tranexamic acid use. After accounting for other important contributing prognostic variables, a delay in the delivery of appropriate pharmacologic prophylaxis for as little as 24 to 48 hours independently confers a clinically meaningful two-fold increase in incidence of VTE. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the contribution of patient predisposition, the importance of injury pattern, and the impact of potentially modifiable post-injury care on risk of VTE after traumatic injury. These factors should be incorporated into a risk stratification framework to individualize VTE risk assessment and support clinical and academic efforts reduce thromboembolic events among trauma patients.Study TypeSystematic Review & Meta-Analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

15.
Thromb Haemost ; 2024 Apr 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38301711

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In most patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CT), essentially those not at high risk of bleeding, guidelines recommend treatment with direct oral anticoagulants as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs). Population-based studies comparing these therapies are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To compare the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrences, significant bleeding, and all-cause mortality in patients with CT receiving rivaroxaban or LMWHs. PATIENTS/METHODS: Using UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink data from 2013 to 2020, we generated a cohort of patients with first CT treated initially with either rivaroxaban or LMWH. Patients were observed 12 months for VTE recurrences, significant bleeds (major bleeds or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding requiring hospitalization), and all-cause mortality. Overlap weighted sub-distribution hazard ratios (SHRs) compared rivaroxaban with LMWH in an intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 2,259 patients with first CT, 314 receiving rivaroxaban, and 1,945 LMWH, mean age 72.4 and 66.9 years, respectively. In the 12-month observational period, 184 person-years following rivaroxaban and 1,057 following LMWH, 10 and 66 incident recurrent VTE events, 20 and 102 significant bleeds, and 10 and 133 deaths were observed in rivaroxaban and LMWH users, respectively. The weighted SHR at 12 months for VTE recurrences in rivaroxaban compared with LMWH were 0.80 (0.37-1.73); for significant bleeds 1.01 (0.57-1.81); and for all-cause mortality 0.49 (0.23-1.06). CONCLUSION: Patients with CT, not at high risk of bleeding, treated with either rivaroxaban or LMWH have comparable effectiveness and safety outcomes. This supports the recommendation that rivaroxaban is a reasonable alternative to LMWH for the treatment of CT.

17.
J Thromb Haemost ; 22(3): 749-764, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38065528

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer commonly require a central venous catheter, which is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Despite the frequent occurrence, the optimal anticoagulation management and outcomes for patients with cancer and catheter-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) are unclear. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the rates of recurrent VTE and bleeding in patients with cancer and catheter-related upper extremity DVT. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and CENTRAL from inception to June 2, 2023. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent VTE, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding. The incidence rates (with 95% CI) of outcomes were pooled using random effects model. RESULTS: We included 29 studies (N = 2,836), among which 5 were prospective. The duration of follow-up and anticoagulation varied considerably. The main long-term anticoagulant used was low molecular weight heparin, followed by direct oral anticoagulants. The pooled 3-month recurrent VTE rate from 14 studies (N = 1,128) was 0.56% (95% CI, 0.10%-3.01%; I2 = 0%). The pooled 3-month major bleeding rate from 10 studies (N = 834) was 2.34% (95% CI, 1.14%-4.76%; I2 = 0%). We were unable to pool event rates beyond 3 months, given high heterogeneity. All studies had serious risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated a relatively low rate of recurrent VTE and moderate rate of major bleeding events within the first 3 months in patients with cancer and catheter-related upper extremity DVT. However, there was significant heterogeneity in the management and reporting after 3 months.


Subject(s)
Central Venous Catheters , Neoplasms , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis , Venous Thromboembolism , Humans , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/diagnosis , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/drug therapy , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Prospective Studies , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/complications , Central Venous Catheters/adverse effects , Neoplasms/complications
19.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 57(2): 312-321, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37932591

ABSTRACT

Although substantial progress has been made in the pathophysiology and management of the post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), several aspects still need clarification. Among them, the incidence and severity of PTS in the real world, the risk factors for its development, the value of patient's self-evaluation, and the ability to identify patients at risk for severe PTS. Eligible participants (n = 1107) with proximal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) from the global GARFIELD-VTE registry underwent conventional physician's evaluation for PTS 36 months after diagnosis of their DVT using the Villalta score. In addition, 856 patients completed a Villalta questionnaire at 24 months. Variable selection was performed using stepwise algorithm, and predictors of severe PTS were incorporated into a multivariable risk model. The optimistic adjusted c-index was calculated using bootstrapping techniques. Over 36-months, 27.8% of patients developed incident PTS (mild in 18.7%, moderate in 5.7%, severe in 3.4%). Patients with incident PTS were older, had a lower prevalence of transient risk factors of DVT and a higher prevalence of persistent risk factors of DVT. Self-assessment of overall PTS at 24 months showed an agreement of 63.4% with respect to physician's evaluations at 36 months. The severe PTS multivariable model provided an optimistic adjusted c-index of 0.68 (95% CI 0.59-0.77). Approximately a quarter of DVT patients experienced PTS over 36 months after VTE diagnosis. Patient's self-assessment after 24 months provided added value for estimating incident PTS over 36 months. Multivariable risk analysis allowed good discrimination for severe PTS.


Subject(s)
Postthrombotic Syndrome , Venous Thromboembolism , Venous Thrombosis , Humans , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/epidemiology , Venous Thrombosis/complications , Venous Thromboembolism/complications , Incidence , Postthrombotic Syndrome/diagnosis , Postthrombotic Syndrome/epidemiology , Postthrombotic Syndrome/etiology , Risk Factors , Registries
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL