4.7 Article

Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease Second Update of the CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

Journal

CHEST
Volume 160, Issue 6, Pages E545-E608

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2021.07.055

Keywords

antithrombotic therapy; DVT; guidelines; pulmonary embolism; thrombosis

Funding

  1. American College of Chest Physicians

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This is the 2nd update to the 9th edition of guidelines, providing recommendations on 17 PICO questions, with four new questions addressed. Strong and weak recommendations were generated based on high-, moderate-, and low-certainty evidence, resulting in 29 guidance statements, 13 of which are strong recommendations. New evidence has emerged since 2016, improving the standard of care for VTE patients, but substantial uncertainty remains regarding certain important management questions.
BACKGROUND: This is the 2nd update to the 9th edition of these guidelines. We provide recommendations on 17 PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) questions, four of which have not been addressed previously. METHODS: We generate strong and weak recommendations based on high-, moderate-, and low-certainty evidence, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology. RESULTS: The panel generated 29 guidance statements, 13 of which are graded as strong recommendations, covering aspects of antithrombotic management of VTE from initial management through secondary prevention and risk reduction of postthrombotic syndrome. Four new guidance statements have been added that did not appear in the 9th edition (2012) or 1st update (2016). Eight statements have been substantially modified from the 1st update. CONCLUSION: New evidence has emerged since 2016 that further informs the standard of care for patients with VTE. Substantial uncertainty remains regarding important management questions, particularly in limited disease and special patient populations.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available