Literature DB >> 28025027

Catheter-directed thrombolysis and pharmacomechanical thrombectomy improve midterm outcome in acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis.

Tzu-Ting Kuo1, Chun-Yang Huang2, Chiao-Po Hsu3, Chiu-Yang Lee4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Aggressive and early thrombus removal strategy has been widely used as a treatment for iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We compared the long-tem venous outcome, including postthrombotic syndrome (PTS), in patients undergoing catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and pharmacomechanical thrombectomy (PMT).
METHODS: From January 2009 to December 2013, 61 patients with acute proximal DVT were enrolled in this prospective study. Thirty-one patients underwent CDT and 30 patients underwent PMT, and each patient was followed for at least 2 years after treatment. Observations included venous outflow resistance, venous insufficiency, thrombus score (TS), severity of PTS, and surgical complications.
RESULTS: Venous outflow obstruction was similar in the CDT and PMT groups (32.3% vs. 30.0%, p = 0.695), and venous insufficiency of each group was 38.7% and 30.0% (p = 0.774), respectively. The TS at 24 months of each group showed no significant difference (0.90 vs. 0.70, p = 0.526). The mean Villalta scale scores of the CDT and PMT groups were 3.13 and 1.87, respectively (p = 0.042). Patients without PTS had significantly lower TS since 1 week postoperatively (1.59 vs. 4.60, p < 0.001). The severity of PTS was highly correlated with the TS, rate of thrombolysis, and severity of obstruction, and was moderately correlated with the venous registry index and reflux severity.
CONCLUSION: CDT and PMT have similar venous outcomes in patients with acute iliofemoral DVT, although PTS is less severe following PMT than after CDT. We propose that early and thorough removal of thrombus, using either CDT or PMT, is beneficial to prevent PTS.
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Taiwan LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  catheter-directed thrombolysis; deep vein thrombosis; pharmacomechanical thrombectomy; postthrombotic syndrome

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28025027     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcma.2016.08.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chin Med Assoc        ISSN: 1726-4901            Impact factor:   2.743


  6 in total

Review 1.  The case for catheter-directed thrombolysis in selected patients with acute proximal deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Thita Chiasakul; Adam Cuker
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-07-24

2.  Percutaneous endovenous intervention versus anticoagulation in the treatment of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Guofu Hu; Jian Wang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-09

3.  A rare coexistence of acute thrombotic occlusion of the left popliteal-tibioperoneal artery and the left iliofemoral vein: a case report.

Authors:  Seyhan Yilmaz; Sabur Zengin
Journal:  Arch Med Sci Atheroscler Dis       Date:  2022-03-28

4.  Thrombolytic strategies versus standard anticoagulation for acute deep vein thrombosis of the lower limb.

Authors:  Cathryn Broderick; Lorna Watson; Matthew P Armon
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-01-19

5.  Safety and efficacy of pharmacomechanical thrombolysis for acute and subacute deep vein thrombosis patients with relative contraindications.

Authors:  Xiangdong Liu; Pengkai Cao; Yunsong Li; Jianing Zhao; Liang Li; Haitao Li; Yanrong Zhang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Comparison of Treatment Result Between Anticoagulation Alone and Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Plus Anticoagulation in Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis.

Authors:  Young Jin Choi; Dong Hyun Kim; Dong Il Kim; Hyun-Yul Kim; Sang Su Lee; Hyuk Jae Jung
Journal:  Vasc Specialist Int       Date:  2019-03
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.