Major bleeding during secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients who have completed anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The anticoagulation length of therapy and risk of new adverse events in venous thromboembolism (ALTERNATIVE) study: Design and survey results

The Anticoagulation Length of Therapy and Risk of New Adverse Events In Venous Thromboembolism (ALTERNATIVE) study was designed to compare the benefits and harms of different treatment options for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). In this paper, we describe the study cohort, survey data collection, and preliminary results. We identified 39,605 adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) from two large integrated health care delivery systems who were diagnosed with incident VTE and received initial anticoagulation therapy of 3 months or longer. A subset of the cohort (12,737) was invited to participate in a survey. Surveys were completed in English, Spanish or Mandarin via a mailed questionnaire, an online secure web link, or telephone. The survey domains included demographics, personal medical history, anticoagulant treatment history, anticoagulant treatment satisfaction, health-related quality of life and health literacy. A total of 5,017 patients participated in the survey for an overall response rate of 39.4%. The mean (SD) age of the survey respondents was 63.0 (14.5) years and self-reported race was 76.0% White/European, 11.1% Black/African American, and 3.8% Asian/Pacific Islander and 14.0% reported Hispanic ethnicity. Sixty percent of respondents completed the web survey, while 29.0% completed the mail-in paper survey, and 11.0% completed the survey via telephone. The ALTERNATIVE Study will address knowledge gaps by comparing several treatment alternatives for the extended management of VTE so that this information could be used by patients and clinicians to make more informed, patient-centered treatment choices.

Long-term risk of major bleeding after discontinuing anticoagulation for unprovoked venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The long-term risk of major bleeding after discontinuing anticoagulant therapy for a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of major bleeding up to 5 years after discontinuing anticoagulation for a first unprovoked VTE.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL (from inception to January 2021) to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies reporting major bleeding after discontinuing anticoagulation in patients with a first unprovoked VTE who had completed ≥3 months of initial treatment. Unpublished data on major bleeding events and person-years were obtained from authors of included studies to calculate study-level incidence rates. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool results across studies.

RESULTS

Of 1123 records identified by the search, 20 studies (17 RCTs) and 8740 patients were included in the analysis. During 13 011 person-years of follow-up after discontinuing anticoagulation, the pooled incidence of major bleeding (n=41) and fatal bleeding (n=7) per 100 person-years was 0.35 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.54) and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05-0.15). The 5-year cumulative incidence of major bleeding was of 1.0% (95% CI, 0.4%-2.4%). The case-fatality rate of major bleeding after discontinuing anticoagulation was 19.9% (95% CI, 10.6%-31.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a first unprovoked VTE have a non-trivial risk of major bleeding once anticoagulants are discontinued. Estimates from this study can help clinicians counsel patients about the incremental risk of major bleeding with extended anticoagulation to guide decision making about treatment duration for unprovoked VTE.

Cost-utility analysis of apixaban compared with usual care for primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer

Background:

Apixaban (2.5 mg) taken twice daily has been shown to substantially reduce the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with placebo for the primary thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory patients with cancer who are starting chemotherapy and are at intermediate-to-high risk of VTE. We aimed to compare the health system costs and health benefits associated with primary thromboprophylaxis using apixaban with those associated with the current standard of care (where no primary thromboprophylaxis is given), from the perspective of Canada’s publicly funded health care system in this subpopulation of patients with cancer over a lifetime horizon.

Methods:

We performed a cost–utility analysis to estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with primary thromboprophylaxis using apixaban. We obtained baseline event rates and the efficacy of apixaban from the Apixaban for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in High-Risk Ambulatory Cancer Patients (AVERT) trial on apixaban prophylaxis. We estimated relative risk for bleeding, risk of complications associated with VTE treatment, mortality rates, costs and utilities from other published sources.

Results:

Over a lifetime horizon, apixaban resulted in lower costs to the health system (Can$7902.98 v. Can$14 875.82) and an improvement in QALYs (9.089 v. 9.006). The key driver of cost–effectiveness results was the relative risk of VTE as a result of apixaban. Results from the probabilistic analysis showed that at a willingness to pay of Can$50 000 per QALY, the strategy with the highest probability of being most cost-effective was apixaban, with a probability of 99.87%.

Interpretation:

We found that apixaban is a cost-saving option for the primary thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory patients with cancer who are starting chemotherapy and are at intermediate-to-high risk of VTE.

Bleeding Risk Assessment in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism

The recommended treatment for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) is anticoagulation for at least 3 months. However, anticoagulant treatment increases the risk of bleeding, and patients at high risk for major bleeding might benefit from treatment discontinuation. In this review, we discuss strategies for assessing bleeding risk and compare different bleeding risk tools. Bleeding risk assessment is best viewed as a continuous approach with varying challenges throughout the acute and chronic phase. At diagnosis, bleeding risk factors must be identified and reversible risk factors treated or modified. After initial treatment, repeated bleeding risk assessment is crucial for the decision on extended/long-term anticoagulation. Current clinical prediction models (e.g., HAS-BLED, RIETE, or VTE-BLEED scores) are externally validated tools with relevant differences in specificity and sensitivity, which can aid in clinical decision-making. Unfortunately, none of the current bleeding risk assessment tools has been investigated in clinical trials and provides evidence to withhold anticoagulation treatment based on the score. Nevertheless, the HAS-BLED or RIETE score can be used to identify patients at high risk for major bleeding during the initial treatment phase, while the VTE-BLEED score might be used to identify patients at low risk for bleeding and, therefore, to safely administer extended/long-term anticoagulation for secondary thromboprophylaxis. As clinical prediction scores still lack predictive value, future research should focus on developing biomarker-based risk assessment models.

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Patients with cancer and VTE are at a markedly increased risk for morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The guideline development process was supported by updated or new systematic evidence reviews. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations address mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, those undergoing a surgical procedure, and ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. The recommendations also address the use of anticoagulation for the initial, short-term, and long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include not using thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy at low risk of VTE and to use low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for initial treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Conditional recommendations include using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, LMWH or fondaparinux for surgical patients with cancer, LMWH or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving systemic therapy at high risk of VTE and LMWH or DOAC for initial treatment of VTE, DOAC for the short-term treatment of VTE, and LMWH or DOAC for the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), occurs in ∼1 to 2 individuals per 1000 each year, corresponding to ∼300 000 to 600 000 events in the United States annually.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about treatment of VTE.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and adult patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 28 recommendations for the initial management of VTE, primary treatment, secondary prevention, and treatment of recurrent VTE events.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE and hemodynamic compromise, use of an international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 over a lower INR range for patients with VTE who use a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for secondary prevention, and use of indefinite anticoagulation for patients with recurrent unprovoked VTE. Conditional recommendations include the preference for home treatment over hospital-based treatment for uncomplicated DVT and PE at low risk for complications and a preference for direct oral anticoagulants over VKA for primary treatment of VTE.

Prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism in hospital and the community: a research programme including the ExACT RCT

Background

Deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, collectively known as venous thromboembolism when clots are formed in the venous circulation, are common disorders that are often unprovoked (i.e. there is no obvious reason for the clot occurring). Some people, after having an unprovoked clot, are at a high risk of developing another, or at risk of developing a secondary clot, most importantly in the lungs. Furthermore, in the long term, some patients will develop circulation problems known as post-thrombotic syndrome. The aim of this programme was to improve the understanding of both the prevention and the treatment of thrombosis in people at the highest risk of recurrence.

Objectives

To clarify if it is possible to identify those people at the highest risk of having a recurrent venous thromboembolism, and if it is possible to prevent this happening by giving anticoagulation treatment for longer. To clarify if it is possible to identify those people at the highest risk of developing post-thrombotic syndrome. To document the current knowledge level about prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. To find what the barriers are to implementing measures to prevent venous thromboembolism. To find the most cost-effective means of treating venous thromboembolism.

Design

Mixed methods, comprising a randomised controlled trial, qualitative studies, cost-effectiveness analyses and questionnaire studies, including patient preferences.

Setting

UK general practices and hospitals, predominantly from the Midlands and Shropshire.

Participants

Adults attending participating anticoagulation clinics with a diagnosis of first unprovoked deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, and health-care professionals, patients and other stakeholders who were involved in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism.

Intervention

Extended treatment with oral anticoagulation therapy (2 years) versus standard care (treatment with oral anticoagulation therapy for at least 3 months).

Results

Work package 1 demonstrated that extended anticoagulation for up to 2 years was clinically effective and cost-effective in reducing the incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism, with a small increase in the risk of bleeding. There was no difference in post-thrombotic syndrome incidence or severity, or quality of life, between those undergoing the extended treatment and those receiving the standard care. Work package 2 identified five common themes with regard to the prevention of hospital-acquired thrombosis: communication, knowledge, role of primary care, education and training, and barriers to patient adherence. Work package 3 suggested that extended anticoagulation with novel oral anticoagulants was cost-effective only at the £20,000-per-quality-adjusted life-year level for a recurrence rate of between 17.5% and 22.5%, depending on drug acquisition costs, while identifying a strong patient preference for extended anticoagulation based on a fear of recurrent venous thromboembolism.

Limitations

The major limitation was the failure to reach the planned recruitment target for work package 1.

Conclusions

Extended anticoagulation with warfarin for a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism is clinically effective and cost-effective and is strongly preferred by patients to the alternative of not having treatment. There are significant barriers to the implementation of preventative measures for hospital-acquired thrombosis. Further research is required on identifying patients in whom it is safe to discontinue anticoagulation, and at what time point following a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism this should be done.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73819751 and EudraCT 2101-022119-20.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 8, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Who should get long-term anticoagulant therapy for venous thromboembolism and with what?

After an initial 3 to 6 months of anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE), clinicians and patients face an important question: "Do we stop anticoagulants or continue them indefinitely?" The decision is easy in some scenarios (eg, stop in VTE provoked by major surgery). In most scenarios, which are faced on a day-to-day basis in routine practice, it is a challenging decision because of uncertainty in estimates in the long-term risks (principally major bleeding) and benefits (reducing recurrent VTE) and the tight trade-offs between them. Once the decision is made to continue, the next question to tackle is "Which anticoagulant?" Here again, it is a difficult decision because of the uncertainty with regard to estimates of efficacy and the safety of anticoagulant options and the tight trade-offs between choices. We conclude with the approach that we take in our clinical practice.

Who should get long-term anticoagulant therapy for venous thromboembolism and with what?

After an initial 3 to 6 months of anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism (VTE), clinicians and patients face an important question: "Do we stop anticoagulants or continue them indefinitely?" The decision is easy in some scenarios (eg, stop in VTE provoked by major surgery). In most scenarios, which are faced on a day-to-day basis in routine practice, it is a challenging decision because of uncertainty in estimates in the long-term risks (principally major bleeding) and benefits (reducing recurrent VTE) and the tight trade-offs between them. Once the decision is made to continue, the next question to tackle is "Which anticoagulant?" Here again, it is a difficult decision because of the uncertainty with regard to estimates of efficacy and the safety of anticoagulant options and the tight trade-offs between choices. We conclude with the approach that we take in our clinical practice.

Economic evaluation of strategies for restarting anticoagulation therapy after a first event of unprovoked venous thromboembolism

Essentials Correct duration of treatment after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) is unknown. We assessed when restarting anticoagulation was worthwhile based on patient risk of recurrent VTE. When the risk over a one-year period is 17.5%, restarting is cost-effective. However, sensitivity analyses indicate large uncertainty in the estimates.

SUMMARY

Background Following at least 3 months of anticoagulation therapy after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE), there is uncertainty about the duration of therapy. Further anticoagulation therapy reduces the risk of having a potentially fatal recurrent VTE but at the expense of a higher risk of bleeding, which can also be fatal. Objective An economic evaluation sought to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of using a decision rule for restarting anticoagulation therapy vs. no extension of therapy in patients based on their risk of a further unprovoked VTE. Methods A Markov patient-level simulation model was developed, which adopted a lifetime time horizon with monthly time cycles and was from a UK National Health Service (NHS)/Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective. Results Base-case model results suggest that treating patients with a predicted 1 year VTE risk of 17.5% or higher may be cost-effective if decision makers are willing to pay up to £20 000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. However, probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that the model was highly sensitive to overall parameter uncertainty and caution is warranted in selecting the optimal decision rule on cost-effectiveness grounds. Univariate sensitivity analyses indicate variables such as anticoagulation therapy disutility and mortality risks were very influential in driving model results. Conclusion This represents the first economic model to consider the use of a decision rule for restarting therapy for unprovoked VTE patients. Better data are required to predict long-term bleeding risks during therapy in this patient group.

Bleeding risk in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism: A critical appraisal of clinical prediction scores

Patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) should receive anticoagulant treatment for at least 3 to 6months. Thereafter, the decision to extend treatment indefinitely for secondary prevention of recurrent events is based on a personalized assessment of the risks of recurrent VTE and anticoagulant-related bleeding. Whereas there are clinical factors that identify patients at higher risk of recurrent VTE, factors to aid the prediction of major bleeding events during anticoagulant therapy have received much less attention. It is now clear that establishing an accurate estimate of the risk of major bleeding is required in treatment decision making. Several studies aimed at deriving new, or validating existing, clinical prediction scores for major bleeding in patients with VTE have been published. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the available clinical prediction scores, highlighting the methodological shortcomings with their derivation and validation, summarize their performance, and provide considerations for bleeding risk assessment in clinical practice.

Prediction of risk of recurrence of venous thromboembolism following treatment for a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism: systematic review, prognostic model and clinical decision rule, and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Unprovoked first venous thromboembolism (VTE) is defined as VTE in the absence of a temporary provoking factor such as surgery, immobility and other temporary factors. Recurrent VTE in unprovoked patients is highly prevalent, but easily preventable with oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy. The unprovoked population is highly heterogeneous in terms of risk of recurrent VTE.

OBJECTIVES

The first aim of the project is to review existing prognostic models which stratify individuals by their recurrence risk, therefore potentially allowing tailored treatment strategies. The second aim is to enhance the existing research in this field, by developing and externally validating a new prognostic model for individual risk prediction, using a pooled database containing individual patient data (IPD) from several studies. The final aim is to assess the economic cost-effectiveness of the proposed prognostic model if it is used as a decision rule for resuming OAC therapy, compared with current standard treatment strategies.

METHODS

Standard systematic review methodology was used to identify relevant prognostic model development, validation and cost-effectiveness studies. Bibliographic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library) were searched using terms relating to the clinical area and prognosis. Reviewing was undertaken by two reviewers independently using pre-defined criteria. Included full-text articles were data extracted and quality assessed. Critical appraisal of included full texts was undertaken and comparisons made of model performance. A prognostic model was developed using IPD from the pooled database of seven trials. A novel internal-external cross-validation (IECV) approach was used to develop and validate a prognostic model, with external validation undertaken in each of the trials iteratively. Given good performance in the IECV approach, a final model was developed using all trials data. A Markov patient-level simulation was used to consider the economic cost-effectiveness of using a decision rule (based on the prognostic model) to decide on resumption of OAC therapy (or not).

RESULTS

Three full-text articles were identified by the systematic review. Critical appraisal identified methodological and applicability issues; in particular, all three existing models did not have external validation. To address this, new prognostic models were sought with external validation. Two potential models were considered: one for use at cessation of therapy (pre D-dimer), and one for use after cessation of therapy (post D-dimer). Model performance measured in the external validation trials showed strong calibration performance for both models. The post D-dimer model performed substantially better in terms of discrimination (c = 0.69), better separating high- and low-risk patients. The economic evaluation identified that a decision rule based on the final post D-dimer model may be cost-effective for patients with predicted risk of recurrence of over 8% annually; this suggests continued therapy for patients with predicted risks ≥ 8% and cessation of therapy otherwise.

CONCLUSIONS

The post D-dimer model performed strongly and could be useful to predict individuals' risk of recurrence at any time up to 2-3 years, thereby aiding patient counselling and treatment decisions. A decision rule using this model may be cost-effective for informing clinical judgement and patient opinion in treatment decisions. Further research may investigate new predictors to enhance model performance and aim to further externally validate to confirm performance in new, non-trial populations. Finally, it is essential that further research is conducted to develop a model predicting bleeding risk on therapy, to manage the balance between the risks of recurrence and bleeding.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003494.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Long-term risk of venous thrombosis after stopping anticoagulants for a first unprovoked event: A multi-national cohort

BACKGROUND

Choosing short-term (3-6 months) or indefinite anticoagulation after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolic event (VTE) is a common and difficult clinical decision. The long-term absolute risk of recurrent VTE after a first unprovoked VTE, in all patients and sub-groups, is not well established, hindering decision making.

METHODS

We conducted a multi-center multi-national prospective cohort study in first unprovoked VTE patients to establish the long-term risk of recurrent VTE after short-term anticoagulation in first unprovoked VTE patients (and sub-groups).We followed patients for symptomatic suspected VTE off of OAT. Suspected recurrent VTE was investigated with reference to baseline imaging and then independently and blindly adjudicated.

FINDINGS

We recruited 663 participants between October, 2001 and March 2006 with the last follow-up in April 2014. During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up, 165/663 suspected VTE (in 408 patients) were adjudicated as recurrent VTE resulting in an annualized risk of recurrent VTE of 5.0% (95% CI: 4.2-5.8%) with a cumulative risk of 29.6% at 8 years. Men had a 7.6% (95% CI: 6.3-9.2%) annual risk of recurrent VTE. High risk women (2 or more HERDOO2 points; see text) had an annual risk of recurrent VTE of 5.9% (95% CI: 4.2-8.1%). Low risk women (1 or 0 HERDOO2 points) had 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6-2.0%) annual risk of recurrent VTE with a cumulative risk of 8.7% at 8 years.

INTERPRETATION

Men and high risk women with unprovoked VTE should be considered for long-term anticoagulant therapy given a high risk of recurrent VTE after long-term follow-up. Women with a low HERDOO2 score may be able to safely discontinue anticoagulants.

FUNDING

This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Grant # MOP 64319) and Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario (Grant # NA 6771). Registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00261014.

Adverse cardiovascular events in acute coronary syndrome with indications for anticoagulation

OBJECTIVES

Randomized acute coronary syndrome (ACS) trials testing various antithrombotic (AT) regimens have largely excluded patients with coexisting conditions and indications for anticoagulation (AC). The purpose of this study is to examine the 2-year clinical outcomes of patients with ACS with indication for AC due to venous thromboembolism (VTE) during hospitalization for the ACS event or a prior or new diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF) with a CHADS2 (Congestive heart failure; Hypertension; Age; Diabetes; previous ischemic Stroke) score ⩾2.

METHODS

ACS patients with AC indication from 2004 to 2009 were identified (n = 619). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to examine the primary efficacy outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) including all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke. The primary explanatory variable was at-discharge antithrombotic strategy [single antiplatelet ± AC, dual antiplatelet (DAP) ± AC or AC only; referent DAP + AC].

RESULTS

A total of 261 (42.2%) patients had a MACE event. AT strategy was not a significant factor for MACE (all p > 0.09). The factors associated with MACE were high mortality risk score [hazard ratio (HR)=1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.39- 2.52; p < 0.001), prior MI (HR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.03-2.01; p= 0.033) and presentation of ST elevation MI (HR = 2.70, 95% CI: 1.61-4.51; p < 0.001) or non-ST elevation MI (HR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.15-2.49; p < 0.001) compared with angina.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real world observational study, the at-discharge AT strategy was not significantly associated with the 2-year risk of MACE. These findings do not negate the need for randomized trials to generate evidence-based approaches to management of this important population.

Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

BACKGROUND

We update recommendations on 12 topics that were in the 9th edition of these guidelines, and address 3 new topics.

METHODS

We generate strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high- (Grade A), moderate- (Grade B), and low- (Grade C) quality evidence.

RESULTS

For VTE and no cancer, as long-term anticoagulant therapy, we suggest dabigatran (Grade 2B), rivaroxaban (Grade 2B), apixaban (Grade 2B), or edoxaban (Grade 2B) over vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy, and suggest VKA therapy over low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH; Grade 2C). For VTE and cancer, we suggest LMWH over VKA (Grade 2B), dabigatran (Grade 2C), rivaroxaban (Grade 2C), apixaban (Grade 2C), or edoxaban (Grade 2C). We have not changed recommendations for who should stop anticoagulation at 3 months or receive extended therapy. For VTE treated with anticoagulants, we recommend against an inferior vena cava filter (Grade 1B). For DVT, we suggest not using compression stockings routinely to prevent PTS (Grade 2B). For subsegmental pulmonary embolism and no proximal DVT, we suggest clinical surveillance over anticoagulation with a low risk of recurrent VTE (Grade 2C), and anticoagulation over clinical surveillance with a high risk (Grade 2C). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism with hypotension (Grade 2B), and systemic therapy over catheter-directed thrombolysis (Grade 2C). For recurrent VTE on a non-LMWH anticoagulant, we suggest LMWH (Grade 2C); for recurrent VTE on LMWH, we suggest increasing the LMWH dose (Grade 2C).

CONCLUSIONS

Of 54 recommendations included in the 30 statements, 20 were strong and none was based on high-quality evidence, highlighting the need for further research.