Covid linked to 33-fold increase in risk of pulmonary embolism

[Northerner]

Catching Covid is associated with a fivefold increase in the risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and a 33-fold increase in risk of a potentially fatal blood clot on the lung in the 30 days after becoming infected, data suggests.

The findings, published in the British Medical Journal on Thursday, could help explain a doubling in the incidence of, and deaths from, blood clots in England since the start of the pandemic compared with the same periods in 2018 and 2019.

They also help to put the very small increased risk of blood clots associated with Covid-19 vaccination into context. “The degree of complications associated with Covid-19 is much stronger and lasts for much longer than what we might be getting after vaccination,” said Dr Frederick Ho, a lecturer in public health at the University of Glasgow, who was not involved in the research.

“Even those people with mild symptoms who do not need to be hospitalised might have a small increase in the risk of [blood clots].”

Covid linked to 33-fold increase in risk of potentially fatal blood clot

Infection with virus also associated with fivefold increase in risk of deep vein thrombosis, data suggests

www.theguardian.com

 

[mikeyB]

Sounds terrible doesn’t it? But what is the absolute risk of pulmonary embolism? I’ll tell you. It occurs in around 60 out of every 100,000 of the population. Without Covid. Are they really saying that increases to 1,980 per 100,000 folk who have Covid?

Don’t believe it. It would be the commonest cause of death by far with Covid infection.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

It occurs in around 60 out of every 100,000 of the population. Without Covid. Are they really saying that increases to 1,980 per 100,000 folk who have Covid?

Pretty much, yes. From the paper Figure 2 gives 0.04% and 0.17% for the proportions of people who were negative and positive for C19 respectively. (So the negative value is pretty close to your 60 in 100k.) And Figure 3 gives 2.27% for the people who were hospitalised.

I'm not sure why it's not more apparent. Before skimming the paper I'd suspect most of these events are happening a while after C19 so wouldn't necessarily be associated with it (other reports have suggested a doubling of risk of death in the year after infection) but I'm not sure that's what they're saying.

 

[Deleted member 21371]

Risks of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and bleeding after covid-19: nationwide self-controlled cases series and matched cohort study

Objective To quantify the risk of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and bleeding after covid-19. Design Self-controlled case series and matched cohort study. Setting National registries in Sweden. Participants 1 057 174 people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 February 2020...

www.bmj.com

Its a well researched paper, no reason not to believe they did the research.

 

[Eddy Edson]

Pretty much, yes. From the paper Figure 2 gives 0.04% and 0.17% for the proportions of people who were negative and positive for C19 respectively. (So the negative value is pretty close to your 60 in 100k.) And Figure 3 gives 2.27% for the people who were hospitalised.

I'm not sure why it's not more apparent. Before skimming the paper I'd suspect most of these events are happening a while after C19 so wouldn't necessarily be associated with it (other reports have suggested a doubling of risk of death in the year after infection) but I'm not sure that's what they're saying.

The data is for 1-30 days after COVID.

The risks unsurprisingly increase with disease severity. ~2% of those hospitalised, ~6% of those in ICU, negligible for mild cases. Ref Table 1.

Surely it's well known that COVID carries big pulmonary embolism risks.

 

[Robin]

Don't understand what is being said here. Covid19 is vaccination. Does he mean after the Jab?

Well, I’m not sure what you mean.
Vaccination is an introduction of dead, attenuated or weakened microorganisms, to provoke an immune response to a disease. Originally used for injecting cowpox virus to prevent smallpox. From Latin 'vacca' meaning cow.
Do you mean 'immunisation'? Which although normally used to imply 'by injection of a vaccine' could be stretched to mean 'by infection and survival of the original pathogen?'

 

[Bruce Stephens]

Does it provide a conclusion on what is the combined effect of having had covid19 and then having 3,4,5,6 jabs in terms of clots? will the risk of blood clots from the Jab apply to each and every jab e.g compounded?

What risks of blood clots from the Jab? There don't appear to be any (for the vaccines we're mostly using): https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...blood-clotting-following-covid-19-vaccination https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html

Don't understand what is being said here. Covid19 is vaccination.

Infection and vaccination are different things. I don't see any benefit in confusing the two except to people wanting to confuse (likely to discourage vaccination).

There are reasonable arguments that you might treat people who've recovered from an infection in similar ways to those who've been vaccinated but that's a separate argument.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

I remembered something about this condition being picked up and they subsequently changed the recommended age groups.

You're perhaps remembering that about the Ox/AZ vaccine, which is (partly) why it's barely being used now in the UK (or US, though the US continues to use the rather similar J&J vaccine).

 

[Deleted member 21371]

Two of my family have just gone down with covid today.
Feeling smug I'm fully vaccinated after going out with one of them yesterday!