Key result
Extended prophylaxis was no more effective than placebo in preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism (OR 0.63) in patients with unprovoked VTE who had completed initial oral anticoagulation therapy.
Why the study?
Does extended thromboprophylaxis prevent recurrent VTE in adults with a first unprovoked VTE after initial oral anticoagulation therapy?
Population
3,436 adults with a first, symptomatic, objectively confirmed, unprovoked VTE who had completed initial oral…
Comparison
Extended thromboprophylaxis vs No prophylaxis, placebo, or another type of…
Design
Meta-analysis
Authors
Loading...
May not warrant extended prophylaxis over placebo after initial anticoagulation for unprovoked VTE; confirms lack of benefit versus placebo.
Systematic Review (n=3,436)
Does extended thromboprophylaxis prevent recurrent VTE in adults with a first unprovoked VTE after initial oral anticoagulation therapy?
Odds Ratio: 0.63 (95% CI 0.38–1.03)
Absolute Event Rate: 11.4% vs 17%
p-value: p=0.07
Current evidence is insufficient to definitively support extended thromboprophylaxis over placebo for preventing recurrent VTE after initial anticoagulation in patients with unprovoked VTE, though rivaroxaban may be more effective than aspirin.
Robertson et al. (2017) conducted a systematic review in Unprovoked venous thromboembolism (n=3,436). Extended prophylaxis (vitamin K antagonists, antiplatelet agents, or DOACs) vs. Placebo or no prophylaxis was evaluated on Recurrent VTE (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.03, p=0.07). Extended prophylaxis was no more effective than placebo in preventing recurrent venous thromboembolism (OR 0.63) in patients with unprovoked VTE who had completed initial oral anticoagulation therapy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: