Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), occurs in ∼1 to 2 individuals per 1000 each year, corresponding to ∼300 000 to 600 000 events in the United States annually. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about treatment of VTE. Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and adult patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. Results: The panel agreed on 28 recommendations for the initial management of VTE, primary treatment, secondary prevention, and treatment of recurrent VTE events. Conclusions: Strong recommendations include the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE and hemodynamic compromise, use of an international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 over a lower INR range for patients with VTE who use a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for secondary prevention, and use of indefinite anticoagulation for patients with recurrent unprovoked VTE. Conditional recommendations include the preference for home treatment over hospital-based treatment for uncomplicated DVT and PE at low risk for complications and a preference for direct oral anticoagulants over VKA for primary treatment of VTE.

The "GRADE-ADOLOPMENT" approach to guideline production combines adoption, adaptation, and, as needed, de novo development of recommendations. If developers of guidelines follow EtD criteria more widely and make their work publically available, this approach should prove even more useful.

IMPORTANCE The optimal oxygen saturation (SpO2) target for extremely preterm infants is unknown. OBJECTIVE To systematically review evidence evaluating the effect of restricted vs liberal oxygen exposure on morbidity and mortality in extremely preterm infants. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, PubMed, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases from their inception to March 31, 2014, and abstracts submitted to Pediatric Academic Societies from 2000 to 2014. STUDY SELECTION All published randomized trials evaluating the effect of restricted (SpO2, 85%–89%) vs liberal (SpO2, 91%–95%) oxygen exposure in preterm infants (<28 weeks’ gestation at birth). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS All meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.2. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess study quality. The summary of the findings and the level of confidence in the estimate of effect were assessed using GRADEpro. Treatment effect was analyzed using a random-effects model. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Death before hospital discharge, death or severe disability before 24 months, death before 24months, neurodevelopmental outcomes, hearing loss, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, and severe retinopathy of prematurity. RESULTS Five trials were included in the final synthesis. These studies had a similar design with a prespecified composite outcome of death/disability at 18 to 24 months corrected for prematurity; however, this outcome has not been reported for 2 of the 5 trials. There was no difference in the outcome of death/disability before 24 months (risk ratio [RR], 1.02 [95% CI, 0.92–1.14]). Mortality before 24 months was not different (RR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.97–1.33]); however, a significant increase in mortality before hospital discharge was found in the restricted oxygen group (RR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.03–1.36]). The rates of bronchopulmonary dysplasia, neurodevelopmental outcomes, hearing loss, and retinopathy of prematurity were similar between the 2 groups. Necrotizing enterocolitis occurred more frequently in infants on restricted oxygen (RR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.05–1.47]). Using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, we found that the quality of evidence for these outcomes was moderate to low. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Although infants cared for with a liberal oxygen target had significantly lower mortality before hospital discharge than infants cared for with a restricted oxygen target, the quality of evidence for this estimate of effect is low. Necrotizing enterocolitis occurred less frequently in the liberal oxygen group. We found no significant differences in death or disability at 24 months, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, retinopathy of prematurity, neurodevelopmental outcomes, or hearing loss at 24 months.