PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: A subset of patients with superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) experiences clot propagation towards deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim of this systematic review is to identify all clinically relevant cross-sectional and prognostic factors for predicting thrombotic complications in patients with SVT.
METHODS: Systematic review.
METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched until 3 March 2023.
METHODS: Original research studies with patients with SVT, DVT and/or PE as the outcome and presenting cross-sectional or prognostic predictive factors.
UNASSIGNED: The CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling (CHARMS) checklist for prognostic factor studies was used for systematic extraction of study characteristics. Per identified predictive factor, relevant estimates of univariable and multivariable predictor-outcome associations were extracted, such as ORs and HRs. Estimates of association for the most frequently reported predictors were summarised in forest plots, and meta-analyses with heterogeneity were presented. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used for risk of bias assessment and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) for assessing the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included (n=10 111 patients). The most reported predictive factors were high age, male sex, history of venous thromboembolism (VTE), absence of varicose veins and cancer. Pooled effect estimates were heterogenous and ranged from OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.75 to 5.59) for the cross-sectional predictor cancer to OR 0.92 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.53) for the prognostic predictor high age. The level of evidence was rated very low to low. Most studies were scored high or moderate risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the pooled estimates of the predictors high age, male sex, history of VTE, cancer and absence of varicose veins showed predictive potential in isolation, variability in study designs, lack of multivariable adjustment and high risk of bias prevent firm conclusions. High-quality, multivariable studies are necessary to be able to identify individual SVT risk profiles.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42021262819.
METHODS: Systematic review.
METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched until 3 March 2023.
METHODS: Original research studies with patients with SVT, DVT and/or PE as the outcome and presenting cross-sectional or prognostic predictive factors.
UNASSIGNED: The CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling (CHARMS) checklist for prognostic factor studies was used for systematic extraction of study characteristics. Per identified predictive factor, relevant estimates of univariable and multivariable predictor-outcome associations were extracted, such as ORs and HRs. Estimates of association for the most frequently reported predictors were summarised in forest plots, and meta-analyses with heterogeneity were presented. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used for risk of bias assessment and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) for assessing the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included (n=10 111 patients). The most reported predictive factors were high age, male sex, history of venous thromboembolism (VTE), absence of varicose veins and cancer. Pooled effect estimates were heterogenous and ranged from OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.75 to 5.59) for the cross-sectional predictor cancer to OR 0.92 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.53) for the prognostic predictor high age. The level of evidence was rated very low to low. Most studies were scored high or moderate risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the pooled estimates of the predictors high age, male sex, history of VTE, cancer and absence of varicose veins showed predictive potential in isolation, variability in study designs, lack of multivariable adjustment and high risk of bias prevent firm conclusions. High-quality, multivariable studies are necessary to be able to identify individual SVT risk profiles.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42021262819.
摘要：
目的：一部分浅表静脉血栓形成（SVT）患者的血块向深静脉血栓形成（DVT）和/或肺栓塞（PE）传播。本系统评价的目的是确定所有临床相关的横断面和预后因素，以预测SVT患者的血栓并发症。
方法：系统评价。
方法：系统搜索PubMed/MEDLINE和Embase，直至2023年3月3日。
方法：针对SVT患者的原始研究，DVT和/或PE作为结果，并呈现横断面或预后预测因素。
■用于预测因素研究的系统评价预测模型（CHARMS）清单的关键评估和数据提取用于系统提取研究特征。根据确定的预测因素，提取了单变量和多变量预测结果关联的相关估计，如OR和HR。在森林地块中总结了最频繁报告的预测因子的关联估计，并提出了具有异质性的荟萃分析。预后研究质量（QUIPS）工具用于偏倚风险评估和建议分级，评估,用于评估证据确定性的开发和评估(等级)。
结果：纳入22项研究（n=10111例患者）。报道最多的预测因素是高年龄，男性,静脉血栓栓塞（VTE）病史，没有静脉曲张和癌症。汇总效应估计值是异质的，从横断面预测癌症的OR3.12（95％CI1.75至5.59）到预后预测高年龄的OR0.92（95％CI0.56至1.53）。证据水平被评为非常低。大多数研究都有高或中等偏倚风险。
结论：尽管预测因子的汇总估计年龄高，男性,VTE的历史，癌症和静脉曲张的缺乏单独显示了预测潜力，研究设计的可变性，缺乏多变量调整和高偏差风险阻碍了坚定的结论。高品质，多变量研究对于识别个体SVT风险特征是必要的。
■CRD42021262819。
方法：系统评价。
方法：系统搜索PubMed/MEDLINE和Embase，直至2023年3月3日。
方法：针对SVT患者的原始研究，DVT和/或PE作为结果，并呈现横断面或预后预测因素。
■用于预测因素研究的系统评价预测模型（CHARMS）清单的关键评估和数据提取用于系统提取研究特征。根据确定的预测因素，提取了单变量和多变量预测结果关联的相关估计，如OR和HR。在森林地块中总结了最频繁报告的预测因子的关联估计，并提出了具有异质性的荟萃分析。预后研究质量（QUIPS）工具用于偏倚风险评估和建议分级，评估,用于评估证据确定性的开发和评估(等级)。
结果：纳入22项研究（n=10111例患者）。报道最多的预测因素是高年龄，男性,静脉血栓栓塞（VTE）病史，没有静脉曲张和癌症。汇总效应估计值是异质的，从横断面预测癌症的OR3.12（95％CI1.75至5.59）到预后预测高年龄的OR0.92（95％CI0.56至1.53）。证据水平被评为非常低。大多数研究都有高或中等偏倚风险。
结论：尽管预测因子的汇总估计年龄高，男性,VTE的历史，癌症和静脉曲张的缺乏单独显示了预测潜力，研究设计的可变性，缺乏多变量调整和高偏差风险阻碍了坚定的结论。高品质，多变量研究对于识别个体SVT风险特征是必要的。
■CRD42021262819。
