Pharmacomechanical Catheter-directed Thrombolysis Research Articles

The background and role of catheter-directed thrombolysis evolving procedures for acute iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis.

Minimal invasive treatment such as early endovenous thrombus removal for iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis (DVT) emerged in the end of last century. The principle is catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) using either plasminogen activating agents alone, as ultrasound-assisted CDT, or in combination with mechanical devices as pharmaco-mechanical CDT. The interest for this treatment modality is the high rate of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) with anticoagulation (AC) alone, especially after iliofemoral DVT. Recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing early thrombus removal with AC alone, as well as non-randomized studies, have demonstrated favorable rates, or at least a decrease of moderate and severe PTS, in favor of these procedures. This article will summarize the background and evolution of the procedures in the last three decades and discuss fundamental criteria for inclusion and exclusion, focusing on the procedures regarding thrombus age and location, technical issues, complications and results including different outcome measures for PTS, for which iliac DVT involvement is a massive risk factor to be prevented.

Effect of Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis on Segmental Artery Occlusions: Insights From the RESCUE Trial

BackgroundReduction in distal vascular volume in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a significant predictor of 30- and 90-day mortality. The likely cause of this is pulmonary arterial obstruction. The effect of pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PM-CDT) on the occlusions of these pulmonary artery (PA) branches is not known. ObjectivesThe RESCUE study evaluated PM-CDT with the Bashir endovascular catheter in patients with acute intermediate-risk PE. This analysis assessed PA occlusions using core laboratory data before and after PM-CDT therapy. MethodsThe baseline and 48-hour post-treatment contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography angiography of PE patients with right ventricular dilatation enrolled in the RESCUE trial were used. The primary analysis was the change in the number of segmental and proximal PA branches with total or subtotal (>65%) occlusions after 48 hours compared to baseline using McNemar’s test. ResultsA total of 107 patients enrolled across 18 United States sites comprised this analysis. At 48 hours post-PM-CDT, the number of segmental PA branches with total or subtotal occlusions decreased from 40.5% to 11.7% (P < 0.0001). Proximal PA branch total or subtotal occlusions decreased from 28.7% to 11.0% (P < 0.0001). The reduction in segmental artery occlusions correlated significantly with the magnitude of reduction in right ventricular/left ventricular ratio (correlation coefficient of 0.287 [95% CI: 0.102-0.452]; P = 0.0026), whereas that in the proximal PA arteries did not (correlation coefficient of 0.132 [95% CI: 0.059-0.314] P = 0.173). ConclusionsPM-CDT with the Bashir catheter was associated with a significant reduction in total and subtotal occlusion of segmental and proximal PAs.

Comparative outcomes of catheter-directed thrombolysis versus AngioJet pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis for treatment of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of pharmacomechanical thrombolysis and thrombectomy (PCDT) plus catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) vs CDT alone for the treatment of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and summarize the clinical experience, safety outcomes, and short- and long-term efficacy. MethodsWe performed a 4-year retrospective, case-control study. A total of 95 consecutive patients with acute symptomatic iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) with a symptom duration of ≤7 days involving the iliac and/or common femoral veins underwent endovascular interventions. The patients were divided into two groups according to their clinical indications: PCDT plus CDT vs CDT alone. Statistical analyses were used to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes between the two groups. Additionally, the patients were followed up for 3 to 36 months after treatment, and the proportions of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) and moderate to severe PTS were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier survival method. ResultsA total of 95 consecutive patients were analyzed in this retrospective study, of whom, 51 underwent CDT alone and 44 underwent PCDT plus CDT. Between the two groups, in terms of immediate-term efficacy and safety, significant differences were found in the catheter retention time (60.64 ± 12.04 hours vs 19.42 ± 4.04 hours; P < .001), dosages of urokinase required (5.82 ± 0.81 million units vs 1.80 ± 0.64 million units; P < .001), the detumescence rate at 24 hours postoperatively (48.46% ± 8.62% vs 76.79% ± 7.98%; P = .026), the descent velocity of D-dimer per day (2266.28 ± 1358.26 μg/L/D vs 3842.34 ± 2048.02 μg/L/D; P = .018), total hospitalization stay (6.2 ± 1.40 days vs 3.8 ± 0.70 days; P = .024), number of postoperative angiograms (2.4 ± 0.80 vs 1.2 ± 0.30; P = .042), and grade III venous patency (>95% lysis: 54.5% vs 68.6%; P = .047). Furthermore, during the follow-up period, significant differences were found in the incidence of PTS (Villalta scale ≥5 or a venous ulcer: 47.0% vs 27.7%; P = .037), and the incidence proportion of moderate to severe PTS at 12 months (15.7% vs 4.5%; P = .024) and 24 months (35.3% vs 11.4%; P = .016). ConclusionsCompared with CDT alone, in the iliofemoral DVT subgroup with a symptom duration of ≤7 days, PCDT plus CDT could significantly relieve early leg symptoms, shorten the hospitalization stay, reduce bleeding complications, promote long-term venous patency, and decrease the occurrence of PTS and the incidence proportion of moderate to severe PTS. Thus, the short- and long-term outcomes both support the superiority of PCDT plus CDT vs CDT in this subgroup.

Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Iliofemoral Deep Venous Thrombosis Through a Jugular Approach with a Rotational Device.

To report the effectiveness of pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) in the management of acute iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis (DVT) via the jugular vein using a slow rotation and large-tip device (SRD) in a large cohort of patients. From 2011 to 2021, 277 patients (mean age 45years, 59.2% women) were treated in 6 centres with PCDT for ilio-fémoral DVT. PCDT was performed via the jugular vein and consisted of one session of fragmentation-fibrinolysis, aspiration and, if needed, angioplasty with stenting. The aim of PCDT was to achieve complete clearance of the venous thrombosis and to restore iliofemoral patency. Residual thrombotic load was assessed by angiography, venous patency by duplex ultrasound and clinical effectiveness by the rate of post-thrombotic syndrome (Villalta score > 4). All patients were treated via the jugular vein using an SRD, and all but one were treated with fibrinolysis. Angioplasty with stenting was performed in 84.1% of patients. After the procedure, the residual thrombotic load at the ilio-fémoral region was < 10% in 96.1% of patients. The rate of major complications was 1.8% (n = 5), the rate of minor complications was 4% (n = 11), and one patient died from pulmonary embolism (0.4%) At a median follow-up of 24months, primary and secondary iliofemoral patency was 89.6% and 95.8%, respectively. The rate of PTS was 13.8% at 12months. PCDT via the jugular vein using an SRD is an efficient treatment for acute iliofemoral DVT and results in high long-term venous patency and low PTS rates. Level of evidence Level 4, Case series.

Angiojet pharmacomechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulant therapy alone in massive cancer-associated thrombosis: a single centre retrospective cohort study.

The therapeutic regimen option for the cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) patients is still a major clinical challenge. The present study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) with AngioJet treatment compared with the conventional anticoagulation alone therapy in the patients with CAT. We retrospectively reviewed the patients who underwent PCDT and/or anticoagulation for the treatment of CAT between August 1, 2016 and March 1, 2022. Each patient was divided into the PCDT group or the anticoagulation alone group. The baseline demographics, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, treatment details, course data were reviewed. A total of 51 eligible patients were included, of whom 21 were in PCDT group (mean age, 60.1 ± 13.0years; 52.4% male) and 30 in anticoagulation alone group (mean age, 66.6 ± 11.1years; 50.0% male). No significant differences regarding age, sex, onset time, limb characteristics, cancer conditions or risk factors were detected (p > .05). After PCDT, grade III lysis was achieved in 8 and grade II lysis in 11 patients. Clinical success was achieved in 90.5% (19/21) patients. The symptoms of leg pain and swelling were significantly improved in both groups. Except for transient macroscopic hemoglobinuria occurring in PCDT group, none of all patients suffered from procedure-related and major complications. Minor complications such as bleeding events occurred in 23.8% (5/21) of patients in PCDT group compared with 10.0% (3/30) in anticoagulation alone group (p > .05). At the 6-month follow-up, iliofemoral patency was found an absolute risk reduction of 37.9% (70.0 vs. 32.1%) (95% CI: 1.183-4.008%; P = 0.010). The incidence of mild PTS was 5.0% (1/20) in PCDT group compared with 10.7% (3/28) in anticoagulation alone group (p > .05). The PCDT is a safe and effective modality in managing patients with CAT, leading to improved clinical outcomes with alowcomplication. The PCDT was more effective than anticoagulation alone in massive symptom relief and venous patency.

Catheter-Directed Interventions for the Treatment of Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis.

Lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) leads to significant morbidity including pain, swelling, and difficulty walking in the affected limb. If left untreated, DVT increases the risk of pulmonary embolism (PE), recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), and post thrombotic syndrome (PTS). The objective of this review was to identify catheter-directed interventions and their success rates for the treatment of lower extremity DVT. A comprehensive search of current and emerging catheter-directed interventions for lower extremity DVT treatment was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar. Clinical trials, retrospective and prospective observational studies, and case reports were identified to classify percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (PMT), catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), and pharmacomechanical CDT (PCDT) devices based on their mechanism of action and indication of use. Catheter-directed interventions such as PMT, CDT, and PCDT offer an alternative therapeutic strategy for DVT management, particularly in patients with limb-threatening conditions and absolute contraindications to anticoagulants. Currently, there are limited guidelines for the use of mechanical and pharmacomechanical devices because of the lack of clinical evidence available for their use in treatment. Future studies are required to determine the short and long-term effects of using catheter-directed interventions as well as their effectiveness in treating acute versus subacute and chronic DVT.

The Importance of Early Thrombus Removal

Historically, anticoagulation has been the primary treatment for acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (DVT) with or without thrombolysis. Despite large amounts of clinical research data supporting an ‘open vein hypothesis’, which favours early thrombus removal, clinicians have been hesitant to take this option due to a historically high risk of major bleeding and a few notable studies that failed to show any meaningful benefit. The ATTRACT trial failed to show the benefit of using pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) for iliofemoral and femoropopliteal DVT but did result in more bleeding. However, the CaVent study before it revealed a significant reduction in post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) for patients with iliofemoral and femoral DVT after long-term follow-up past 24 months that grew over time. Since these trials, there have been significant advancements in magnetic resonance and CT venography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), venous stenting and thrombectomy catheters meaning there is little to no need for adjunct thrombolytics. Results from ongoing research such as CLEAR-DVT reflect the advances in modern technology.

INTRACEREBRAL HEMORRHAGE POSTPHARMACOMECHANICAL CATHETER-DIRECTED THROMBOLYSIS: CAN WE PREVENT IT?

INTRACEREBRAL HEMORRHAGE POSTPHARMACOMECHANICAL CATHETER-DIRECTED THROMBOLYSIS: CAN WE PREVENT IT?

Predictors of Clinical Outcomes of Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis: Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Trial

PurposeTo identify the baseline patient characteristics that predict who will benefit from pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Materials and MethodsIn the Acute Venous Thrombosis: Thrombus Removal with Adjunctive Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis (ATTRACT) multicenter randomized trial, 381 patients with acute iliofemoral DVT underwent PCDT and anticoagulation or anticoagulation alone. The correlations between baseline factors and venous clinical outcomes were evaluated over 24 months using post hoc regression analyses. Interaction terms were examined to evaluate for differential effects by treatment arm. ResultsPatients with clinically severe DVT (higher baseline Villalta score) experienced greater effects of PCDT in improving 24-month venous outcomes, including moderate or severe postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) (odds ratios [ORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs] per unit increase in the baseline Villalta scores were as follows: for PCDT, OR, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.01–1.15]; for control, OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.12–1.29]; Pinteraction = .03), PTS severity (between-arm differences in the Villalta [Pinteraction = .004] and Venous Clinical Severity Scale [VCSS] [Pinteraction = .002)] scores), and quality of life (between-arm difference in the Venous Insufficiency Epidemiological and Economic Study Quality of Life score; Pinteraction = .025). Patients with previous DVT had greater effects of PCDT on 24-month PTS severity than those in patients without previous DVT (mean [95% CI] between-arm difference in the Villalta score, 4.2 [1.56–6.84] vs 0.9 [−0.44 to 2.26], Pinteraction = .03; mean [95% CI] between-arm difference in the VCSS score, 2.6 [0.94–4.21] vs 0.3 [−0.58 to 1.14], Pinteraction = .02). The effects of PCDT on some but not all outcomes were greater in patients presenting with left-sided DVT (Villalta PTS severity, Pinteraction = .04; venous ulcer, Pinteraction = .0499) or a noncompressible popliteal vein (PTS, Pinteraction = .02). The effects of PCDT did not vary by sex, race, ethnicity, body mass index, symptom duration, hypertension, diabetes, or hypercholesterolemia. ConclusionsIn patients with acute iliofemoral DVT, greater presenting clinical severity (higher baseline Villalta score) and a history of previous DVT predict enhanced benefits from PCDT.

The Effect of Balloon-Assisted Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis on the Patency and Post-Thrombotic Syndrome in Patients with Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis: Is it Really Necessary or Not?

The objective of this study was to describe the contribution and advantage of balloon-dilatation of iliac and femoral veins following pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) on the development of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). From October 2018 and January 2022, 85 patients with acute total occlusion of the iliac and femoral veins were treated with PCDT. The cohort was divided into 2 groups depending on the utilization of concomitant balloon dilatation of iliac and femoral veins (Group 1, n=34, 40.0%) or not (Group 2, n=51, 60.0%) during the PCDT. All patients underwent duplex ultrasound scanning for evaluating the patency of iliac veins and recanalization rates at 3, 6, and 12months postoperatively. The Villalta score was used to score the severity of PTS at 12months postoperatively. Patients who underwent balloon-assisted PCDT (group 1) exhibited significantly higher primary patency rates in common iliac vein (CIV) (recanalization 84.3±14.6%, P=0.003), external iliac vein (EIV) (recanalization 82.8±17.2, P=0.003) and common femoral vein (CFV) (recanalization 88.1±12.1%, P=0.038) compared with the group 2 at the end of 12months follow-up. Only 2 patients underwent venous stenting in follow-up due to severe venous claudication, however, 13 patients were required iliac vein stenting due to severe PTS proved with a high Villalta score at 12-month follow-up. The d-dimer level at 1-year follow-up had also significantly lower in Group 1 due to higher rates of patency and lower thrombosis burden. The most common bleeding events were hematuria (n=4) or oozing in the puncture site (n=4). This study showed that balloon-assisted PCDT reduces the risk of PTS, is more successful in common iliac vein recanalization, reduces the need for the venous stent, and even lowers the D-dimer levels of the patients compared to routine PCDT alone.

Clinical Outcomes of a Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Venous Thrombolysis Strategy That Included Rheolytic Thrombectomy in a Multicenter Randomized Trial

Thrombus removal of early proximal deep vein thrombosis using a pharmacomechanical thrombectomy catheter (AngioJet) improved symptoms and quality of life; however, at 1 year, no persistent advantages were found, including the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). This was a subset analysis of the ATTRACT (acute venous thrombosis: thrombus removal with adjunctive catheter-directed thrombolysis) trial (multicenter, randomized, prospective) considering the patients who had undergone thrombectomy with an AngioJet compared with anticoagulation alone. At the 33 clinical sites, 173 patients were included from facilities that had incorporated the AngioJet into their thrombectomy protocol. Of these 173 patients, 75 had actually had the AngioJet used. The data analyzed included all patients randomized to a site that had incorporated the Angiojet regardless of whether the device was used. A second analysis was performed to examine those who had actually had the AngioJet device used. Both the aggregate group and the AngioJet group had similar outcomes. Of the 75 patients, 40% had developed PTS, with 12% developing moderate to severe PTS within 2 years, similar to the control arm. No differences were found in any of the quality of life scores. At 24 months, the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was 13.9% in the AngioJet group vs 6.8% in the control group (P < .5). This subset analysis of patients enrolled in the ATTRACT trial who had had deep vein thrombosis and had undergone thrombus removal with an AngioJet showed similar results to the main study, which had included any type of pharmacomechanical device. The AngioJet mechanical thrombectomy device has been available for >15 years, with much data in existence. The catheters have evolved over time to include the addition of thrombolytic agents in catheters with stronger rheolytic capability. It is clear that the device effectively removes thrombus. However, what has been largely unknown is the effects on the delicate venous endothelium. In this study, AngioJet patients had twice the risk of VTE recurrence. Were these patients predisposed to recurrent VTE from the type of thrombus (location, extent) or had additional endothelial damage occurred above and beyond the original thrombus? This study has, by no means, answered this question but has provided further evidence toward the lack of long-term advantages of pharmacomechanical devices.

Abstract No. 154 Relationship between baseline clinical features of DVT and clinical outcomes with pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis

Abstract No. 154 Relationship between baseline clinical features of DVT and clinical outcomes with pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis

Comparative Effectiveness of Current Thrombolysis and Thrombectomy Catheters for Deep Vein Thrombosis

Comparative Effectiveness of Current Thrombolysis and Thrombectomy Catheters for Deep Vein Thrombosis

Catheter directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis in 2022: Rationale, evidence base and future directions

IntroductionCatheter directed thrombolysis (CDT) has evolved as a treatment modality for patients diagnosed with proximal and caval deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and has shown to be superior in certain subset of patient population despite conflicting evidence as seen in the large 4 randomized controlled trials. Rationale for CDT in acute DVT patientsDVT adversely affects the quality of life and adds significantly to the treatment and hospitalization costs. CDT and pharmaco-mechanical catheter directed thrombolysis (PCDT) has been shown to accelerate symptom resolution, decrease symptom severity and decrease recurrence rates with successful procedures in certain patients. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs)Four RCTs have evaluated the use of CDT and PCDT in acute proximal DVT patients suggesting clinical benefit compared to anticoagulation alone. These trials suggested using CDT for proximal DVT patients with a lower bleeding risk as CDT may decrease PTS. Successful CDT treatment showed improvement in moderate to severe symptoms of post thrombotic syndrome (PTS). However, these studies have limitations including the use of non-standard techniques, different equipment and different endpoints. Future directions and conclusionOur goal is to highlight the factors which can potentially improve CDT outcomes in proximal DVT patients. Based on studies, patients with proximal DVT and a low bleeding risk may benefit from early CDT by decreased symptom severity of PTS, however, improvement in procedural technique, equipment and procedural success rates is necessary. With appropriate patient selection, and objective endpoints, we can further establish the benefit of CDT and PCDT in acute DVT patients.

Pharmaco-mechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis versus recanalization and stenting for post thrombotic syndrome after lower limb deep vein thrombosis: a comparative study.

Endovenous interventional procedures can be used in addition to therapeutic anticoagulation to treat deep vein thrombosis in selected patients with proximal vein involvement (vena cava, iliac and/or common femoral). The aim of this study was to compare venous patency and the post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients treated with pharmaco-mechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PMT) versus recanalization-stenting for PTS after a proximal lower limb deep vein thrombosis. Between January 2014 and December 2020, this retrospective and monocentric study included patients with very symptomatic acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis treated with PMT within 21 days after diagnosis (PMT group) and patients with PTS caused by chronic venous obstruction treated with recanalization and stenting (CRS group). A total of 116 patients were included (26 PMT, 90 CRS). The rate of primary patency was 81.8% (18/22 patients) in the PMT group and 78.4% (69/88) in the CRS group (P>0.99). The rate of venous patency at the last follow-up was 76.9% (20/26) in the PMT group and 82.2% (74/90) in the CRS group (P=0.57). The median number of stents was 2 (range, 0-5) in the PMT group and 3 (range, 0-7) in the CRS group (P<0.001). The median stent length was 150 mm (range, 60-390 mm) and 280 mm (range, 120-820 mm), respectively (P<0.001). The median last Villalta score was 2 (range, 0-10) in the PMT group and 2 (range, 0-21) in the CRS group (P=0.55). The rate of venous claudication at the last follow-up was 19.0% (4/21) in the PMT group and 12.0% (10/83) in the CRS group (P=0.47). In this study, there was no difference in venous patency and in the rate and severity of PTS between the PMT and CRS groups. The number of stent and their length were significantly lower in the PMT group compared with the CRS group.

Invasive and Pharmacological Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Scoping Review.

The annual occurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is 300,000-600,000 cases in the United States and 700,000 in Europe. VTE includes deep venous thrombosis (DVT) of upper or lower extremities, superior and inferior vena cava thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism (PE) as well. The primary treatment of DVT includes oral anticoagulation to prevent the progression of the thrombus and decrease the risk of pulmonary embolism. Depending on the symptoms, more invasive treatments can be applied to target the iliofemoral thrombus and its removal. However, less emphasis is given to acute symptomatology, early recovery of function, quality of life improvement, and the individualized likelihood of developing post-thrombotic syndrome. While invasive therapy has been used to enhance the acute management of iliofemoral DVT, our knowledge about the overall outcomes associated with the invasive treatment of VTE is still limited. In this review, we illustrate the available data on pharmacological and endovascular management of iliofemoral VTE, including therapies such as catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), mechanical thrombectomy (PMT), and pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT).

Prevention of the Postthrombotic Syndrome with Anticoagulation: A Narrative Review.

The postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) is chronic venous insufficiency secondary to a prior deep vein thrombosis (DVT). It is the most common complication of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and, while not fatal, it can lead to chronic, unremitting symptoms as well as societal and economic consequences. The cornerstone of PTS treatment lies in its prevention after DVT. Specific PTS preventative measures include the use of elastic compression stockings and pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis. However, the efficacy of these treatments has been questioned by large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). So far, anticoagulation, primarily prescribed to prevent DVT extension and recurrence, appears to be the only unquestionably effective treatment for the prevention of PTS. In this literature review we present pathophysiological, biological, radiological, and clinical data supporting the efficacy of anticoagulants to prevent PTS and the possible differential efficacy among available classes of anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists [VKAs], low molecular weight heparins [LMWHs] and direct oral anticoagulants [DOACs]). Data suggest that LMWHs and DOACs are superior to VKAs, but no head-to-head comparison is available between DOACs and LMWHs. Owing to their potentially greater anti-inflammatory properties, LMWHs could be superior to DOACs. This finding may be of interest particularly in patients with extensive DVT at high risk of moderate to severe PTS, but needs to be confirmed by a dedicated RCT.

Safety and Efficacy of Endovascular Treatment on Pregnancy-Related Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis.

Objective: This study investigates the safety and efficacy of endovascular treatments on pregnancy-related iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data of 46 patients who had symptomatic pregnancy-related iliofemoral DVT and underwent endovascular treatment. The patients treated with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) were classified as the CDT group. In contrast, those treated with CDT combined with pharmacomechanical thrombectomy (PMT) or angioplasty/stenting were classified as the pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) group. Results: Based on the immediate post-operative clot burden reduction rate analysis of 46 patients: 22 cases were completely dissolved (lysis grades III), 12 were partially dissolved (lysis grades II), and 12 failed (lysis grades I). There was a statistically significant difference in the rate of clot burden reduction between the CDT group (n = 19) and the PCDT group (n = 27) (p = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of bleeding events between the two groups (p = 0.989). At 24 months, cumulative venous patency in the CDT group was 50.0%, compared to 78.2% in the PCDT group. Furthermore, there was a statistically significant difference in Villalta score (p = 0.001) and venous severity scoring (VCSS score) (p = 0.005) between the two groups. Conclusions: CDT treatment combined with PMT or angioplasty/stenting is comparatively safe and effective for pregnant-related DVT patients. PCDT outperforms CDT in terms of immediate efficacy and reduces the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome with better midterm outcomes.

Comparison of Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis versus Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for the Treatment of Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis: Measures of Long-Term Clinical Outcome and Quality of Life

In this 5-year follow-up study of patients treated for acute iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pharmacomechanical thrombectomy (PT) treatment was associated with a reduction in severity but not incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), while there was improvement in quality of life (QoL).

Pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis in a large study population

BackgroundWe have analyzed our single-center immediate and follow-up results in the management of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (IFDVT) using pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PMCDT) to determine the safety, accuracy, and effects on quality of life and whether this treatment strategy prevents post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). MethodsThe cases of 230 patients who had undergone PMCDT to treat IFDVT from January 2017 to December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The preoperative, operative, and postoperative variables, Marder scores, outcomes, and follow-up assessments with the Villalta score and venous clinical severity score were investigated. ResultsAnatomic success was achieved for 95.2% of the 230 patients. The mean Marder score had decreased from 12.65 ± 2.1 to 2.4 ± 1.3 postoperatively (P < .01). Early recurrent thrombosis had developed in 13 patients (5.65%). The primary patency at the 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up visits was 94.0%, 87.2%, and 81.7%, respectively. From 1 to 6 months, the Villalta score had decreased from 8.32 ± 4.14 to 3.43 ± 0.61 and the venous clinical severity score had decreased from 4.0 ± 1.8 to 1.82 ± 0.36 (P < .05). No statistically significant difference was found in the PTS severity scores at 12 months of follow-up compared with at 6 months. The mean change in the venous disease-specific quality of life from baseline to 12 months was 29.41 ± 1.99 (P = .029). The total recurrence rate was 19.63% at 1 year. ConclusionsFor a select group of patients with acute IFDVT, the use of PMCDT and postoperative anticoagulation therapy offered significant reductions in clot burden, leg pain, and swelling, achieving a significant reduction in PTS severity scores at 6 months.