Duration of treatment with vitamin K antagonists in symptomatic venous thromboembolism
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, the most frequently used secondary treatment for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) consists of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) targeted at an international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.5 (range 2.0 to 3.0). However, based on the continuing risk of bleeding and uncertainty regarding the risk of recurrent VTE, discussion on the proper duration of treatment with VKA for these patients is ongoing. Several studies have compared the risks and benefits of different durations of VKA in patients with VTE. This is the third update of a review first published in 2000. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different durations of treatment with vitamin K antagonists in patients with symptomatic venous thromboembolism. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched October 2013) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2013, Issue 9. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled clinical trials comparing different durations of treatment with vitamin K antagonists in patients with symptomatic venous thromboembolism. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors (SM, MP, and BH) extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials independently. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven studies with a total of 3716 participants were included. A consistent and strong reduction in the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolic events was observed during prolonged treatment with VKA (risk ratio (RR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.38) independent of the period elapsed since the index thrombotic event. A statistically significant "rebound" phenomenon (ie, an excess of recurrences shortly after cessation of prolonged treatment) was not found (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.70). In addition, a substantial increase in bleeding complications was observed for patients receiving prolonged treatment during the entire period after randomization (RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.49). No reduction in mortality was noted during the entire study period (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.21, P = 0.46). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this review shows that treatment with VKA strongly reduces the risk of recurrent VTE for as long as they are used. However, the absolute risk of recurrent VTE declines over time, although the risk for major bleeding remains. Thus, the efficacy of VKA administration decreases over time since the index event.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
We identified 19 systematic reviews and 13 RCTs (n=8593) to inform this recommendation.
“We identified 19 systematic reviews 239-257 and 13 RCTs 88,258,259,261,262,265,267,298,306-310 (n 5 8593) to inform this recommendation.”
From American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (2020) · cites this paper as [245]
The risk of recurrent VTE while on anticoagulant therapy with a VKA was 1.6% in a Cochrane meta-analysis.
“The risk of recurrent VTE while on anticoagulant therapy with a VKA was 1.6% in a Cochrane meta-analysis. 245”
From American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (2020) · cites this paper as [245]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 57 · Cited by 133
- Authors
- Middeldorp, S., Prins, M. H., & Hutten, B. A.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-08-05
- Volume
- 2014
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- CD001367-CD001367
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- PMC
- PMC7074008
- OpenAlex
- W2118150212
- Cited by
- 133
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 2.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (13/89/23, 10/4001/14)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Internal Medicine › Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Blood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
- Keywords
- vitamin K antagonists, venous thromboembolism, anticoagulation duration, secondary prevention, recurrent venous thromboembolism, bleeding complications, mortality, rebound effect, international normalized ratio, long-term anticoagulation, risk-benefit assessment
- MeSH terms
- Anticoagulants, Drug Administration Schedule, Hemorrhage, Humans, Thromboembolism, Time Factors, Vitamin K, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, International Normalized Ratio, Venous Thrombosis, Secondary Prevention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review