Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 20, 2025

Point-Of-Care Ultrasound Screening for Proximal Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis
Published on: February 10, 2023
Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Acute Medically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Anat Gafter-Gvili1, Genady Drozdinsky2, Oren Zusman3
1Department of Medicine A and Institute of Hematology, Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah Tikva, Israel; Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Objective:
Current guidelines recommend pharmacologic prophylaxis for medical patients at high risk for venous thromboembolism. We aimed to assess the benefit and safety of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients hospitalized.
Methods:
We prepared a retrospective cohort study in a tertiary hospital in Israel with patients hospitalized in medical departments with an admission lasting more than 48 hours during 2014-2017.
Primary Outcome:
30-day mortality.
Secondary Outcomes:
90-day incidence of pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, and major bleeding. Propensity-weighted logistic multivariate analysis was performed.
Results:
A total of 18,890 patient-unique episodes were included in the analysis. Of them, 3206 (17.0%) received prophylaxis. A total of 1309 (6.9%) died, 540/3206 (16.8%) of those who received venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and 769/15,864 (4.9%) of those who did not. Prophylaxis was not associated with a reduction in mortality, multivariable-adjusted odds ratio propensity-weighted (OR) 0.99 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.14). One hundred forty-two patients (0.7%) developed venous thromboembolism, 44/3206 (1.4%) of those who received prophylaxis and 98/15,864 (0.6%) of those who did not. Prophylaxis was not associated with reduction in venous thromboembolism in the whole cohort, multivariable-adjusted propensity-weighted OR 1.09 (95% CI, 0.52-2.29). Prophylaxis was associated with an increase in major bleeding (multivariable-adjusted propensity-weighted OR 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04-1.48).
Conclusion:
The current practice of routinely administering venous thromboembolism prophylaxis to medically ill patients considered at high risk for thrombosis resulted in a high risk for bleeding without a clear clinical benefit, and should be reassessed.
Related Concept Videos
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Venous Thrombosis IV: Nursing Management
Pulmonary Embolism III: Nursing Management
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Venous Thrombosis II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Venous Thrombosis I: Introduction

