4.6 Article

Direct oral anticoagulant use in gynecologic oncology: A Society of Gynecologic Oncology Clinical Practice Statement

期刊

GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
卷 160, 期 1, 页码 312-321

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.11.020

关键词

Venous thromboembolism; Direct oral anticoagulant; DOAC; Thrombosis; Anticoagulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses the use of DOAC in patients with gynecologic malignancies, providing clinical data and evidence quality, although studies were primarily conducted in mixed cancer subtype populations. Due to limited data on gynecologic cancer patients, the study results still provide the best evidence for current treatment recommendations.
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in women with gynecologic malignancies. This practice statement provides clinical data and overall quality of evidence regarding the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this patient population. Specifically, it reviews patient selection, safety measures, and nuances of perioperative use of these medications. The scope of this document is limited to DOAC use in gynecologic oncology rather than a broad discussion of VTE prophylaxis and management in general. The following recommendations and examination of extant data are based on DOAC trials conducted primarily in mixed populations with different cancer subtypes. Many of these trials include few, or no, women with gynecologic cancer. However, because there is very limited data in gynecologic cancer-specific populations, the results of these studies represent the best available evidence to support treatment recommendations in our patients. The members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) Clinical Practice Committee believe that the results of these studies may be extrapolated, with caution, to VTE treatment and prophylaxis for patients with gynecologic cancer. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据