SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

Risk of Deep Venous Thrombosis in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

· 2026-07-29

DOI: 10.20944/preprints202607.2094.v1

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Background: Parkinson's disease (PD) may increase the risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) through immobility, autonomic dysfunction, and perioperative factors. However, the magnitude of this association remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate DVT risk in patients with PD. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to July 1, 2026. Observational studies comparing DVT risk in adults with PD versus controls were included. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Prespecified subgroup analyses evaluated study design, geographic region, and clinical setting. Results: Sixteen studies comprising 819,514 participants met inclusion criteria; 14 studies involving 800,040 participants and 2,176 DVT events contributed to the quantitative synthesis. PD was associated with a significantly increased DVT risk (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.41-3.53; p<0.001), with substantial heterogeneity (I²=67.2%). The strongest associations were observed in nonsurgical cohorts (RR 6.07, 95% CI 3.20-11.49) and Asian populations (RR 6.04, 95% CI 3.26-11.19). Conclusions: PD is associated with a significantly increased risk of DVT. Enhanced risk stratification and further evaluation of thromboprophylaxis strategies may be warranted, particularly in medically managed nonsurgical patients.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.