Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 140 of the 140 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Guidance for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism

Open access
Streiff, Michael B., Agnelli, Giancarlo, Connors, Jean M., Crowther, Mark, Eichinger, Sabine, Lopes, Renato, McBane, Robert D., Moll, Stephan, Ansell, Jack·2016·Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis

Abstract

This guidance document focuses on the diagnosis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Efficient, cost effective diagnosis of VTE is facilitated by combining medical history and physical examination with pre-test probability models, D dimer testing and selective use of confirmatory imaging. Clinical prediction rules, biomarkers and imaging can be used to tailor therapy to disease severity. Anticoagulation options for acute VTE include unfractionated heparin, low molecular weight heparin, fondaparinux and the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). DOACs are as effective as conventional therapy with LMWH and vitamin K antagonists. Thrombolytic therapy is reserved for massive pulmonary embolism (PE) or extensive deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Inferior vena cava filters are reserved for patients with acute VTE and contraindications to anticoagulation. Retrievable filters are strongly preferred. The possibility of thoracic outlet syndrome and May-Thurner syndrome should be considered in patients with subclavian/axillary and left common iliac vein DVT, respectively in absence of identifiable triggers. The optimal duration of therapy is dictated by the presence of modifiable thrombotic risk factors. Long term anticoagulation should be considered in patients with unprovoked VTE as well as persistent prothrombotic risk factors such as cancer. Short-term therapy is sufficient for most patients with VTE associated with transient situational triggers such as major surgery. Biomarkers such as D dimer and risk assessment models such the Vienna risk prediction model offer the potential to customize VTE therapy for the individual patient. Insufficient data exist to support the integration of bleeding risk models into duration of therapy planning.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11239-015-1317-0

Cites

140 of 140 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 140 references

Cited by

See all 344

Metadata

Authors
Streiff, M. B., Agnelli, G., Connors, J. M., Crowther, M., Eichinger, S., Lopes, R., McBane, R. D., Moll, S., & Ansell, J.
Venue
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
Published
2016-01
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
32-67
ISSN
  • 0929-5305 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-742X
OpenAlex
W2284149813
Cited by
344
References
140
FWCI
32.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Guidance for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11239-015-1317-0
The paper
Streiff, M. B., Agnelli, G., Connors, J. M., Crowther, M., Eichinger, S., Lopes, R., McBane, R. D., Moll, S., & Ansell, J. (2016). Guidance for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-015-1317-0

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.