4.5 Review

Risk of intracranial bleeding in patients with primary brain cancer receiving therapeutic anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism: A meta-analysis

Journal

BRAIN AND BEHAVIOR
Volume 10, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.1638

Keywords

anticoagulation; brain cancer; intracranial hemorrhage; meta-analysis; venous thromboembolism

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in glioma patients. Also, spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is frequently observed in subjects with primary brain tumors. Thus, the management of anticoagulant therapy for VTE is challenging and controversial in these patients. We performed a meta-analysis to clarify the risk of ICH in glioma patients treated with anticoagulant therapy for VTE compared to glioma patients without VTE. Materials and Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases between January 1980 and January 2019 without language restrictions. Summary statistics for ICH were obtained by calculating the odds ratio (OR) using a random effects model, and heterogeneity across studies was estimated by the I-2 statistic. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of studies. Results A total of 368 studies were initially identified. Of these, 346 were excluded after title review. The remaining 22 studies were reviewed in detail. According to the PICO criteria, 15 studies were excluded. Finally, 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The OR for ICH in glioma patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation for VTE versus those who did not receive anticoagulation was 3.66 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.84-7.29; I-2 = 31%). Conclusions This meta-analysis demonstrates that anticoagulation for VTE increases the risk of ICH in subjects with malignant brain tumors. Future studies are warranted to fully understand the best medical treatment of VTE in glioma patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available