Oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) vs conventional anticoagulation: Recurrent VTEc
Oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) showed no clear difference in recurrent VTEc compared with conventional anticoagulation (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) vs conventional anticoagulation Recurrent VTEc · people with a pulmonary embolism, confirmed by standard imaging techniques Oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) showed no clear difference in recurrent VTEc compared with conventional anticoagulation (moderate certainty). Oral direct thrombin inhibitors or oral factor Xa inhibitors versus conventional anticoagulants for the… (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 0.93 [0.52, 1.66] | 1 study · 1602 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral direct thrombin inhibitors or oral factor Xa inhibitors versus conventional anticoagulants for the treatment of pulmonary embolism 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.