Key result
Among 11 patients diagnosed with acute deep vein thrombosis in an orthopedics clinic, predisposing factors included high altitude, diabetes, and smoking, and all were treated with 6 months of anticoagulant therapy.
Why the study?
Literature on upper extremity deep vein thrombosis is limited, and failure to consider it in differential diagnoses in orthopedics and traumatology may increase morbidity and mortality.
Observational (n=11)
No
Highlights the importance of considering deep vein thrombosis in the differential diagnosis of orthopedic patients to prevent delayed diagnosis and increased morbidity and mortality.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support DVT consideration in orthopedic patients; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis is rare but not unimportant. The current literature is limited and its management largely has the same applications as the treatment of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis. The fact that deep vein thrombosis has similar findings to many different diseases in Orthopedics and Traumatology clinics and that it can develop secondary to primary pathologies should definitely be considered in differential diagnoses. Not considering delayed deep vein thrombosis diagnoses in differential diagnoses may also lead to an increase in patient morbidity and mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ertuğrul Allahverdi (2025) conducted an observational in Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis (n=11). Low molecular weight Heparin and acetylsalicylic acid was evaluated on Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes. Among 11 patients diagnosed with acute deep vein thrombosis in an orthopedics clinic, predisposing factors included high altitude, diabetes, and smoking, and all were treated with 6 months of anticoagulant therapy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: