Author: Wretborn, Jens; Jörg, Matthias; Benjaminsson Nyberg, Patrik; Wilhelms, Daniel B.
Title: Risk of venous thromboembolism in a Swedish healthcare system during the COVIDâ€19 pandemic: A retrospective crossâ€sectional study Cord-id: y3iixkg9 Document date: 2021_9_1
ID: y3iixkg9
Snippet: OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the risk and prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) for patients undergoing a diagnostic test for VTE with confirmed COVIDâ€19 infection compared with patients with no COVIDâ€19 infection. METHODS: This was a retrospective crossâ€sectional study of patients in an integrated healthcare system in Sweden, covering a population of 465,000, with a diagnostic test for VTE between March 1 and May 31 in the years 2015 to 2020. Risk for VTE
Document: OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the risk and prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) for patients undergoing a diagnostic test for VTE with confirmed COVIDâ€19 infection compared with patients with no COVIDâ€19 infection. METHODS: This was a retrospective crossâ€sectional study of patients in an integrated healthcare system in Sweden, covering a population of 465,000, with a diagnostic test for VTE between March 1 and May 31 in the years 2015 to 2020. Risk for VTE with COVIDâ€19 was assessed by logistic regression, adjusting for baseline risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 8702 patients were included, and 88 of those patients tested positive on the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSâ€CoVâ€2) polymerase chain reaction test. A positive SARSâ€CoVâ€2 test did not increase the odds for VTE (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55–1.74) and did not change when adjusting for sex, previous VTE, previous malignancy, Charlson score, hospital admission, intensive care, or ongoing treatment with anticoagulation (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.16–3.3). The prevalence of VTE was unchanged in 2020 compared with 2015 to 2019 (16.5% vs 16.1%, respectively), and there was no difference in VTE between the SARSâ€CoVâ€2 positive, negative, or untested groups in 2020 (15.9%, 17.6%, and 15.7%, respectively; P = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: We found no increased prevalence of VTE in the general population compared with previous years and no increased risk of VTE in patients who were SARSâ€CoVâ€2 positive, suggesting that SARSâ€CoVâ€2 status should not influence VTE workup in the emergency department. The prevalence of VTE was high in patients with SARSâ€CoVâ€2 treated in the intensive care unit (ICU), where the suspicion for VTE should remain high.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- Try single phrases listed below for: 1
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date