↓ Skip to main content

Treatment options for venous thromboembolism: lessons learnt from clinical trials

Overview of attention for article published in Thrombosis Journal, December 2014
Altmetric Badge


16 Dimensions

Readers on

42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Treatment options for venous thromboembolism: lessons learnt from clinical trials
Published in
Thrombosis Journal, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12959-014-0027-8
Pubmed ID

Simon McRae


Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a common condition associated with a significant clinical and economic burden. Anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay of treatment for VTE, having been shown to reduce the risk of death in patients with pulmonary embolism, and recurrence or extension of thrombi in patients with deep vein thrombosis during the initial treatment period. Long-term anticoagulation is indicated in some individuals with VTE, depending on individual risk of VTE recurrence and anticoagulant-related bleeding. Management of VTE in clinical practice is often complex because patients' characteristics and treatment needs may differ considerably from those encountered in clinical trials. Current guidelines recommend the use of either low molecular weight heparins or fondaparinux overlapping with and followed by a vitamin K antagonist for the initial treatment of VTE, with the vitamin K antagonist continued when long-term anticoagulation is required. These traditional anticoagulants have practical limitations that have led to the development of direct oral anticoagulants that directly target either Factor Xa or thrombin and are administered at a fixed dose without the need for routine coagulation monitoring. This review discusses practical considerations for hospital physicians and haematologists in the management of VTE treatment, including the potential for the direct oral anticoagulants to simplify treatment.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Greece 1 2%
Unknown 40 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 19%
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 8 19%