The use of weighted and scored risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism

Alex C. Spyropoulos; Thomas McGinn; Alok A. Khorana

doi:10.1160/TH12-07-0508

Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Thromb Haemost 2012; 108(06): 1072-1076
DOI: 10.1160/TH12-07-0508

Clinical Focus

Schattauer GmbH

The use of weighted and scored risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism

Authors

Alex C. Spyropoulos

¹James P. Wilmot Cancer Center and Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA;
Thomas McGinn

²North Shore/LIJ Health System, Department of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
Alok A. Khorana

¹James P. Wilmot Cancer Center and Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA;

Abstract

Summary

Formalised risk assessment models (RAMs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) using weighted and scored variables have only recently been widely incorporated into international antithrombotic guidelines.Scored and weighted VTE RAMs have advantages over a simplified group-specific VTE risk approach, with the potential to allow more tailored strategies for thromboprophylaxis and an improved estimation of the risk/benefit profile for a particular patient. The derivation of VTE RAMs should be based on variables that are a priori defined or identified in a univariate analysis and the predictive capability of each variable should be rigorously assessed for both clinical and statistical significance and internal consistency and completeness. The assessment of the RAM should include the goodness of fit of the model and construction of a prognostic index score. Any VTE RAM which has been derived must undergo validation of that model before it can be used in clinical practice. Validation of the model should be performed in a “deliberate”prospective fashion across several diverse clinical sites using pre-defined criteria using basic standards for performing model validation. We discuss the basic concepts in the derivation of recent scored and weighted VTE RAMs in hospitalised surgical and medical patients and cancer outpatients, the mechanisms for accurate external validation of the models, and implications for their use in clinical practice.

Keywords

Venous thrombosis - risk factors - epidemiological studies

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Gould MK, Garcia DA, Wren SM. et al. Prevention of VTE in nonorthopedic surgical patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. lChest 2012; 141 (Suppl. 02) e227S-277S.
2 Spyropoulos AC. Risk assessment of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized medical patients. Curr Opin Pulm Med 2010; 16: 419-425.
3 Alikhan R, Cohen AT, Combe S. et al. Risk factors for venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with acute medical illness: analysis of the MEDENOX Study. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 963-968.
4 Cohen AT, Alikhan R, Arcelus JI. et al. Assessment of venous thromboembolism risk and the benefits of thromboprophylaxis in medical patients. Thromb Haemost 2005; 94: 750-759.
5 Khorana AA, Kuderer NM, Culakova E. et al. Development and validation of a predictive model for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis. Blood 2008; 111: 4902-4907.
6 Royston P, Moons KG, Altman DG. et al. Prognosis and prognostic research: Developing a prognostic model. Br Med J 2009; 338: b604.
7 Mandala M, Barni S, Floriani I. et al. Incidence and clinical implications of venous thromboembolism in advanced colorectal cancer patients: the ’GISCAD-alternating schedule’ study findings. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 65-73.
8 Spyropoulos AC. Upper vs. lower extremity deep vein thrombosis: outcome definitions of venous thromboembolism for clinical predictor rules or risk factor analyses in hospitalized patients. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7: 1041-1042.
9 McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC. et al. Users’ guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. J Am Med Assoc 2000; 284: 79-84.
10 Bahl V, Hu HM, Henke PK. et al. A validation study of a retrospective venous thromboembolism risk scoring method. Ann Surg 2010; 251: 344-350.
11 Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W. et al. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation. J Am Med Assoc 2001; 285: 2864-2870.
12 Wu O, Bayoumi N, Vickers MA. et al. ABO(H) blood groups and vascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost 2008; 6: 62-69.
13 Risk of and prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in hospital patients.Thromboembolic Risk Factors (THRIFT) Consensus Group. Br Med J 1992; 305: 567-574.
14 Clagett GP, Anderson Jr. FA, Geerts W. et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. Chest 1998; 114 (Suppl. 05) 531S-560S.
15 Turpie AG, Chin BS, Lip GY. ABC of antithrombotic therapy: Venous thromboembolism: treatment strategies. Br Med J 2002; 325: 948-950.
16 Goldhaber SZ, Savage DD, Garrison RJ. et al. Risk factors for pulmonary embolism. The Framingham Study. Am J Med 1983; 74: 1023-1028.
17 Laffan M, Tuddenham E. Science, medicine, and the future: assessing thrombotic risk. Br Med J 1998; 317: 520-523.
18 Spyropoulos AC, Anderson Jr. FA, Fitzgerald G. et al. Predictive and Associative Models to Identify Hospitalized Medical Patients at Risk for VTE. Chest 2011; 140: 706-714.
19 Kucher N, Koo S, Quiroz R. et al. Electronic alerts to prevent venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 969-977.