SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014
Statins for primary prevention of venous thromboembolism.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Statins for the primary prevention of venous thromboembolism.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- Dispensed prescription medications and short-term risk of pulmonary embolism in Norway and Sweden.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Statins and Venous Thromboembolic Disease - Where are we Now?Current vascular pharmacology · 2024Review
- Differential effect of statin use on coagulation markers: an active comparative analysis in the NEO study.Thrombosis journal · 2021Article
- Mechanisms and mitigating factors for venous thromboembolism in chronic kidney disease: the REGARDS study.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2018Article
- Significance of venous thromboembolism in women with uterine carcinosarcoma.Gynecologic oncology · 2018Article
- Review
- Prospective study of plasma D-dimer and incident venous thromboembolism: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study.Thrombosis research · 2015Article
- COVID-19 and Thromboinflammation: Is There a Role for Statins?Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)Review
- Aspirin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after hip or knee arthroplasty: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
- Aspirin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after hip or knee arthroplasty: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in clinical practice. The efficacy of statins in the primary prevention of VTE remains unproven. This is an update of the review first published in 2011.
objectivesTo assess the efficacy of statins in the primary prevention of VTE. SEARCH
methodsFor this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases (PVD) Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched February 2014) and CENTRAL (2014, Issue 1). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed statins in the primary prevention of VTE were considered. The outcomes we evaluated were the rates of VTE, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, death and adverse events. Two authors (L Li, JH Tian) independently selected RCTs against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third author (KH Yang). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction was independently carried out by two authors (L Li, JH Tian). Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third author (PZ Zhang). Two authors (L Li, JH Tian) independently assessed the risk of bias according to a standard quality checklist provided by the PVD Group. MAIN
resultsFor this update we included one RCT with 17,802 participants that assessed rosuvastatin compared with placebo for the prevention of VTE. The quality of the evidence was moderate because of imprecision, as the required sample size for the outcomes of this review was not achieved. Analysis showed that when compared with placebo rosuvastatin reduced the incidence of VTE (odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.86) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.79), the risk of any (fatal and non-fatal) myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.69), and any (fatal and non-fatal) stroke (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.78). There was no difference in the incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.46), fatal MI (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.53 to 4.22), fatal stroke (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.09) or death after VTE (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.24). The incidence of any serious adverse events was no different between the rosuvastatin and placebo groups (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.20). AUTHORS'
conclusionsAvailable evidence showed that rosuvastatin was associated with a reduced incidence of VTE, but the evidence was limited to a single RCT and any firm conclusions and suggestions could be not drawn. Randomised controlled trials of statins (including rosuvastatin) are needed to evaluate their efficacy in the prevention of VTE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.