Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37680313›Full record

ReviewResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2023

Thromboembolism in nephrotic syndrome: controversies and uncertainties.

Kathrine Parker, Omar Ragy, Patrick Hamilton, Jecko Thachil, Durga Kanigicherla

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Renal Vein Thrombosis: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Membranous Nephropathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kathrine ParkerManchester Institute of Nephrology and Transplantation, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Omar RagyManchester Institute of Nephrology and Transplantation, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Patrick HamiltonManchester Institute of Nephrology and Transplantation, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Jecko ThachilDepartment of Haematology, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Durga KanigicherlaManchester Institute of Nephrology and Transplantation, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Wellcome Centre for Cell-Matrix Research · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBManchester University NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Thromboembolism is one of the most serious complications of nephrotic syndrome, including both arterial and venous thromboembolic events. Rates of thromboembolism depend on a multitude of factors, including the severity and cause of nephrotic syndrome, with primary membranous nephropathy having the highest reported rates. In relation to arterial thromboembolism, the risk can be as high as 8 times that of an age- and sex-matched population. However, extrapolating risks is challenging, with published studies not being homogeneous, several being single center and retrospective, and including different causes of primary nephrotic syndrome. Determining thromboembolic risk in nephrotic syndrome is essential to enable decision making on preventive strategies. However, lack of proven strategies to help estimate risk-benefit aspects underpins variations in clinical practice. Although the use of anticoagulation following a thrombotic event is clear, this still leaves us with a clinical dilemma as to if, and who, should receive prophylactic anticoagulation, with what agent, and for how long. In the absence of clear evidence to answer these questions, prophylactic anticoagulation strategies for nephrotic syndrome currently rely on expert consensus opinion, such as in the recently published 2021 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes glomerular disease guidelines. In the mainstay, these recommendations relate to patients with membranous nephropathy. Here, we detail the current controversies still faced by clinicians around the risk of thromboembolism in nephrotic syndrome, use of prophylactic anticoagulation in nephrotic syndrome and propose ways of advancing existing knowledge and practice in this field to unravel the conundrum.

Indexed as

anticoagulantsarterial thromboembolismglomerulonephritisnephrotic syndromevenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID37680313
PMCPMC10480654
OpenAlexW4385652404

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.