Thrombolysis For Deep Vein Thrombosis Research Articles

Catheter-directed thrombolysis of deep vein thrombosis: literature review and practice considerations.

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a major health problem worldwide. The risk of pulmonary embolism following DVT is well established, but the long-term vascular sequelae of DVT are often underappreciated, costly to manage, and can have extremely detrimental effects on quality of life. Treatment of DVT classically involves oral anticoagulation, which reduces the risk of pulmonary embolism but does not remove the clot. Anticoagulation therefore does little to prevent the venous damage and scarring that occurs following DVT, leaving the patient at risk for permanent venous insufficiency and development of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) is a minimally invasive endovascular treatment that is used as an adjunct to anticoagulation. CDT lowers the risk of PTS by reducing clot burden and protecting against valvular damage. A catheter is advanced directly to the site of thrombosis under fluoroscopy followed by a slow, prolonged infusion of a relatively low dose of thrombolytic agent. CDT restores venous patency faster than anticoagulation, which hastens the relief of acute symptoms. Adjunctive CDT modalities have become increasingly popular among interventional radiologists, allowing for additional mechanical thrombectomy or ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis at the time of catheter placement. These pharmacomechanical CDT (PCDT) techniques have the potential to reduce treatment time and associated healthcare costs. Numerous observational and retrospective studies have consistently shown a benefit of CDT plus anticoagulation over anticoagulation alone for prevention of PTS. Patients with long life expectancy and acute thrombosis involving the iliac and proximal femoral veins (iliofemoral DVT) have the greatest benefit from CDT, which may decrease the risk of PTS and/or decrease the severity of PTS symptoms if they do occur. Randomized controlled trials remain limited but generally support the observational data. CDT also plays an important role in those with acute limb-threatening venous occlusion or severe symptoms from DVT. Although adverse outcomes are rare, a potential devastating outcome is intracranial bleeding. While the available literature suggests the risk of serious morbidity from bleeding is quite rare, the absolute risk of bleeding is not clear and will require outcomes data from randomized trials. Future studies should also examine the cost-effectiveness of CDT for PTS prevention, particularly with respect to quality-adjusted life years, and compare the effectiveness of available PCDT devices.

A Blue Leg: An Interventional Approach to a Limb-Threatening Deep Vein Thrombosis

A Blue Leg: An Interventional Approach to a Limb-Threatening Deep Vein Thrombosis

Thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis.

Standard treatment for deep vein thrombosis aims to reduce immediate complications. Use of thrombolysis or clot dissolving drugs could reduce the long-term complications of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) including pain, swelling, skin discolouration, or venous ulceration in the affected leg. This is the third update of a review first published in 2004. To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy and anticoagulation compared to anticoagulation alone for the management of people with acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower limb as determined by the effects on pulmonary embolism, recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, post-thrombotic complications, venous patency and venous function. For this update the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (February 2016). In addition the CIS searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CENTRAL (2016, Issue 1)). Trial registries were searched for details of ongoing or unpublished studies. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining thrombolysis and anticoagulation versus anticoagulation for acute DVT were considered. For this update (2016), LW and CB selected trials, extracted data independently, and sought advice from MPA where necessary. We assessed study quality with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Data were pooled using a fixed-effect model unless significant heterogeneity was identified in which case a random-effects model was used. GRADE was used to assess the overall quality of the evidence supporting the outcomes assessed in this review. Seventeen RCTs with 1103 participants were included. These studies differed in the both thrombolytic agent used and in the technique used to deliver it. Systemic, loco-regional and catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) were all included. Fourteen studies were rated as low risk of bias and three studies were rated as high risk of bias. We combined the results as any (all) thrombolysis compared to standard anticoagulation. Complete clot lysis occurred significantly more often in the treatment group at early follow-up (RR 4.91; 95% CI 1.66 to 14.53, P = 0.004) and at intermediate follow-up (RR 2.44; 95% CI 1.40 to 4.27, P = 0.002; moderate quality evidence). A similar effect was seen for any degree of improvement in venous patency. Up to five years after treatment significantly less PTS occurred in those receiving thrombolysis (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.81; P < 0.0001; moderate quality evidence). This reduction in PTS was still observed at late follow-up (beyond five years), in two studies (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.77; P < 0.0001; moderate quality evidence). Leg ulceration was reduced although the data were limited by small numbers (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.16 to 4.73, P = 0.87). Those receiving thrombolysis had increased bleeding complications (RR 2.23; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.52, P = 0.0006; moderate quality evidence). Three strokes occurred in the treatment group, all in trials conducted pre-1990, and none in the control group. There was no significant effect on mortality detected at either early or intermediate follow-up. Data on the occurrence of pulmonary embolism (PE) and recurrent DVT were inconclusive. Systemic thrombolysis and CDT had similar levels of effectiveness. Studies of CDT included two trials in femoral and iliofemoral DVT, and results from these are consistent with those from trials of systemic thrombolysis in DVT at other levels of occlusion. Thrombolysis increases the patency of veins and reduces the incidence of PTS following proximal DVT by a third. Evidence suggests that systemic administration and CDT have similar effectiveness. Strict eligibility criteria appears to improve safety in recent studies and may be necessary to reduce the risk of bleeding complications. This may limit the applicability of this treatment. In those who are treated there is a small increased risk of bleeding. Using GRADE assessment, the evidence was judged to be of moderate quality due to many trials having low numbers of participants. However, the results across studies were consistent and we have reasonable confidence in these results.

Post-thrombotic syndrome after catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis (CaVenT): 5-year follow-up results of an open-label, randomised controlled trial

Post-thrombotic syndrome is a common complication after acute proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and is associated with reduced quality of life and a substantial cost burden. In the 2-year results of the CaVenT study, additional catheter-directed thrombolysis reduced the risk of post-thrombotic syndrome by 14% compared with conventional therapy, but did not affect quality of life. In this study we report results at the 5-year follow-up, aiming to assess whether findings for post-thrombotic syndrome and quality of life have persisted. Between Jan 3, 2006, and Dec 22, 2009, we recruited patients aged 18-75 years with a first-time high proximal leg DVT from 20 hospitals in the Norwegian southeastern health region. With sealed envelopes, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard treatment with compression stockings and anticoagulants (control group) or to standard treatment plus catheter-directed thrombolysis with alteplase within 21 days from symptom onset. Pre-specified outcomes in this analysis were post-thrombotic syndrome at 5 years as assessed with the Villalta score and scores for quality of life at 5 years with EQ-5D and the disease-specific VEINES-QOL/Sym. Analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00251771. At 5 year follow-up (last date Oct 14, 2014), data were available for 176 patients (84% of the 209 patients originally randomised)--87 originally assigned to catheter-directed thrombolysis and 89 originally assigned to the control group. 37 patients (43%; 95% CI 33-53) allocated to catheter-directed thrombolysis developed post-thrombotic syndrome, compared with 63 (71%; 95% CI 61-79) allocated to the control group (p<0·0001), corresponding to an absolute risk reduction of 28% (95% CI 14-42) and a number needed to treat of 4 (95% CI 2-7). Four (5%) patients assigned to catheter-directed thrombolysis and one (1%) to standard treatment had severe post-thrombotic syndrome (Villalta score ≥ 15 or presence of an ulcer). Quality-of-life scores with either assessment scale did not differ between the treatment groups. Additional catheter-directed thrombolysis resulted in a persistent and increased clinical benefit during follow-up for up to 5 years, supporting the use of additional catheter-directed thrombolysis in patients with extensive proximal DVT. However, allocation to this therapy did not lead to better quality of life. The optimal endovascular thrombolytic approach needs further investigation. Southeastern Norway Regional Health Authority, the Research Council of Norway, University of Oslo, Oslo University Hospital.

A Multicenter, Retrospective Study of the Effectiveness of the Trellis-8 System in the Treatment of Proximal Lower-Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) occurs in up to 600,000 patients in the United States annually and can lead to long-term morbidity because of the post-thrombotic syndrome. The multicenter isolated-pharmacomechanical thrombolysis device (ISOL-8) study was designed to determine the safety and efficacy of the Trellis™-8 peripheral infusion system when used as the primary intervention to achieve DVT thrombolysis in patients with proximal lower-extremity occlusive DVT, and track the incidence and severity of the post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) symptoms in patients 2 years after treatment. Data were collected retrospectively from 6 centers on patients treated with the Trellis-8 system, an isolated-pharmacomechanical thrombolysis device (IPMTD). Patients with occlusive lower-extremity DVT involving at least the iliac and/or common femoral vein were included. Patient demographics, medical history, procedure outcomes, complications, and follow-up venous duplex and Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) were collected through 24 months. Data analysis of outcomes were performed at 1 and 12 months. A 24-month analysis was not performed because of the small number of patients for whom 24-month data could be collected. A total of 151 limbs in 139 patients were treated with IPMTD. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) procedure time was 122.6 ± 63.4 min. Single session treatment was delivered in 69.9% (93 of 133) of cases. Occlusive DVT extended from the femoral into the external and/or common iliac vessel segments in most of the cases (113 of 151 limbs; 74.8%). Before treatment, 23.2% (35 of 151) of the treated limbs, based on a history of prior ipsilateral DVT or preoperative imaging revealing chronic venous scar, were expected to have some chronic venous disease despite presenting with acute symptoms. After treatment, 43.7% (66 of 151) of the limbs showed evidence of chronic thrombus. The average amount (mean ± SD) of thrombolysis, as determined by venogram, was highest in patients who had acute thrombus (81 ± 19.7%), compared with subacute thrombus (61 ± 22.5%) and complex cases involving acute and/or subacute thrombus on chronic scar (56 ± 26.5%). VCSS scoring showed the number of patients with none and/or mild pain, varicose veins, and skin changes at 1-month remained stable at 12 months whereas the percent of patients with none and/or mild venous edema improved from 71.7% at 1 month (38 of 53) to 86.8% (46 of 53) at 12 months. Twenty-four-month follow-up data were available for only 15% (23 of 151) of patients. No clinically significant pulmonary emboli or major periprocedural bleeding events were reported. Patients with acute lower-extremity DVT involving the proximal veins can be safely and successfully treated with IPMTD. Major procedural bleeding was absent. The occurrence of severe PTS after primary treatment with Trellis-8 system IPMTD is low. Further long-term follow-up data are needed to confirm the benefit of intervention for thrombus removal compared with standard medical management.

Catheter-based therapies for deep vein thrombosis.

The basic treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) over the past several decades has consisted of anticoagulation only, with inferior vena cava filtration for those who either failed or could not tolerate anticoagulation. Until recently no randomized trials had studied the efficacy of thrombolysis in DVT despite advances in techniques and technologies for endovascular clot removal. This article is a review of the current evidence on catheter-based therapies for patients with DVT. Technical considerations to improve outcome as well as optimal patient selection are discussed.

Residual rates of reflux and obstruction and their correlation to post-thrombotic syndrome in a randomized study on catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis.

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) often results in venous valvular incompetence and incomplete recanalization, followed by post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). Treatment with additional catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) in patients with an iliofemoral DVT has been shown to reduce the frequency of PTS. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of CDT on venous reflux and patency and to identify possible predictors for the development of PTS. Open, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Patients (18-75years) with a first-time iliofemoral DVT were randomized to receive conventional treatment with anticoagulation and compression stockings or CDT in addition to conventional treatment. Follow-up after 6 and 24months included ultrasound and air plethysmography for evaluation of venous reflux and patency. PTS was assessed with the Villalta score. Possible predictors of PTS were analyzed in multivariate logistic regression models. Following additional CDT, deep venous reflux was detected in 65.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.8-74.2) of patients at 6months and 66.7% (95% CI, 56.4-75.6) at 24months. The absolute risk reduction of deep venous reflux was 11.9% (95% CI, 1.1-24.9) after 6months and 16.5% (95% CI, 4.2-28.8) after 24months in the CDT arm compared with controls. Correspondingly, venous patency was regained in 65.9% (95% CI, 55.5-75.0) of patients at 6months and 74.7% (95% CI, 64.9-82.6) after 24months. Patency was regained in 18.5% (95% CI, 4.4-32.6) more patients after 6months and 15.1% (95% CI, 1.8-28.5) more patients after 24months compared with controls. Independent of treatment allocation, patients with fully recanalized and competent deep veins at 6-month follow-up had a 40.5% (95% CI, 26.4-54.7) absolute risk reduction of developing PTS compared with patients with abnormal vein assessment. Reflux and lack of patency at 6months were found to be independent predictors of PTS development in patients treated with CDT (odds ratio, 8.3; 95% CI, 2.6-26.8 for patients with reflux, and odds ratio, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.49 for patients with patency). Additional CDT improved patency and reduced reflux. Both parameters were found to be strong predictors of PTS in patients treated with CDT. Noninvasive vein assessments of patency and reflux may be helpful to identify and monitor patients at high risk of PTS. Our findings provide evidence for the importance of early recanalization with CDT for acute iliofemoral DVT.

Symptom burden and job absenteeism after treatment with additional catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis

IntroductionAdditional catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) reduces long-term postthrombotic syndrome and is likely to represent a cost-effective alternative treatment compared to the standard treatment of anticoagulation and elastic compression stockings. Accelerated thrombus resolution has also been suggested to improve symptoms and patient function in the acute phase. We aimed to investigate whether additional CDT led to fewer symptoms and job absenteeism during the first 6 months after initiation of DVT treatment compared to standard treatment alone.MethodsThe Catheter-directed Venous Thrombolysis (CaVenT) study was a multicenter open label, randomized controlled trial of patients ages 18 years to 75 years with a verified high proximal DVT, <21 days of symptoms, and no apparent bleeding risk. Patients were allocated to additional CDT or to standard treatment only. Symptoms were assessed at baseline and at 6 months using items from the generic and disease-specific quality of life questionnaires EQ-5D and VEINES-QOL/Sym, respectively. Individual data on sickness benefits related to venous thromboembolic disease were obtained from the national welfare service.ResultsA total of 90 patients allocated additional CDT and 99 control patients completed long-term follow-up and were included in the analyses. Twenty-four in the CDT arm and 40 controls received sick leave (P = 0.046). When considering working patients only (54 in the CDT arm and 72 controls) this difference was no longer statistically significant. Mean duration of job absenteeism was 86.4 days (95% confidence interval 59.4–113.5) in the CDT arm and 60.1 days (95% confidence interval 42.3–77.8) in controls (P = 0.072). After 6 months, more controls experienced frequent swelling of the leg compared with those allocated to CDT (47 [49.0%] patients versus 25 [29.4%] patients, respectively, [P = 0.007]).ConclusionThere are limitations to our data, but the findings indicate improved symptom relief and less frequent job absenteeism in patients treated with additional CDT; this expands upon previously established benefits from this treatment.

Health-related quality of life after catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis: secondary outcomes of the randomised, non-blinded, parallel-group CaVenT study

ObjectivesTo investigate whether additional catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) improves long-term quality of life (QOL) compared with standard treatment with anticoagulation and compression stockings alone in patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis...

Cost-effectiveness of additional catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis

Additional treatment with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) has recently been shown to reduce post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). To estimate the cost effectiveness of additional CDT compared with standard treatment alone. Using a Markov decision model, we compared the two treatment strategies in patients with a high proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and a low risk of bleeding. The model captured the development of PTS, recurrent venous thromboembolism and treatment-related adverse events within a lifetime horizon and the perspective of a third-party payer. Uncertainty was assessed with one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyzes. Model inputs from the CaVenT study included PTS development, major bleeding from CDT and utilities for post DVT states including PTS. The remaining clinical inputs were obtained from the literature. Costs obtained from the CaVenT study, hospital accounts and the literature are expressed in US dollars ($); effects in quality adjusted life years (QALY). In base case analyzes, additional CDT accumulated 32.31 QALYs compared with 31.68 QALYs after standard treatment alone. Direct medical costs were $64,709 for additional CDT and $51,866 for standard treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $20,429/QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analysis showed model sensitivity to the clinical efficacy of both strategies, but the ICER remained < $55,000/QALY over the full range of all parameters. The probability that CDT is cost effective was 82% at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000/QALY gained. Additional CDT is likely to be a cost-effective alternative to the standard treatment for patients with a high proximal DVT and a low risk of bleeding.

Alt Ekstremite Derin Ven Trombozunda Kateter Aracılığıyla Trombolizin Erken Dönem Sonuçları

Alt Ekstremite Derin Ven Trombozunda Kateter Aracılığıyla Trombolizin Erken Dönem Sonuçları

抗リン脂質抗体症候群(APS)による深部静脈血栓症にカテーテル治療が奏功し，下大静脈フィルターの永久留置を回避できた1例

抗リン脂質抗体症候群(APS)による深部静脈血栓症にカテーテル治療が奏功し，下大静脈フィルターの永久留置を回避できた1例

Safety and Feasibility of Ultrasound-accelerated Catheter-directed Thrombolysis in Deep Vein Thrombosis

Objective One in four patients with primary iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) develops post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) within 1 year despite optimal standard anticoagulant therapy. Removal of thrombus by thrombolytic drugs may prevent PTS. The aim of this study was to assess the short-term safety and efficacy of ultrasound-accelerated catheter-directed thrombolysis (US-accelerated CDT). Design This was a prospective non-randomised interventional study with US-accelerated CDT for DVT. Patients and methods Twelve patients with DVT (seven caval–iliofemoropopliteal, three iliofemoropopliteal, one femoropopliteal and one superior caval vein thrombosis) receiving standard anticoagulant and compression therapy, were treated with additional US-accelerated CDT (13 procedures) using the EKOS Endowave ® system (EKOS Corporation, Bothell, WA, USA) between October 2008 and January 2010. Results Thrombolysis was successful in 85% (11/13), with complete clot lysis (>90% restored patency) and in one case with partial clot lysis (50–90% restored patency). No pulmonary embolism and one bleeding at the catheter-insertion site were observed. In three patients, underlying lesions were successfully treated with balloon angioplasty and stent insertion. Four patients developed early recurrent thrombosis due to untreated residual venous obstruction. Conclusion US-accelerated CDT is a safe and promising treatment in patients with DVT. Residual venous obstruction should be treated by angioplasty and stent insertion to avoid early re-thrombosis.

Catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis

Strong proof-of-concept evidence suggests that catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) may enable prevention of the post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The goal of this review is to summarize recent publications and thereby improve physicians' ability to make sound clinical judgments on employing CDT. Anticoagulation and compression therapy are necessary elements of PTS prevention efforts, but are not sufficient to prevent PTS in many DVT patients. Patients with acute iliofemoral DVT represent a subgroup at particularly high risk of developing recurrent venous thromboembolism and PTS. Three comparative studies and the preliminary results of one ongoing European randomized controlled trial (RCT) (the CaVenT trial) suggest that CDT is reasonably well tolerated and that it may provide superior clinical outcomes for patients with extensive proximal DVT. In the US, the ongoing NIH-sponsored ATTRACT trial should clarify the risk-benefit ratio of pharmacomechanical CDT for acute proximal DVT. In the meantime, the preponderance of available evidence suggests that CDT (with anticoagulation) should be routinely considered as first-line therapy for patients with extensive acute iliofemoral DVT, low expected bleeding risk, and good functional status. CDT should be employed for DVT patients who have severe clinical manifestations such as acute circulatory limb threat, for patients who have not achieved therapeutic objectives with initial anticoagulation, and as first-line therapy for selected patients with acute iliofemoral DVT.

Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis of Deep Vein Thrombosis in a Patient with Churg-Strauss Syndrome: A Case Report

Vasculitis by Churg-Strauss Syndrome (CSS) is an uncommon disease characterized by the inflammation of blood vessel walls and can involve many organs. The clinical manifestations and courses of vasculitis are highly variable. Deep vein thrombosis has rarely been reported in vasculitis by CSS. We report a case of deep vein thrombosis associated with CSS that was successfully treated by catheter-directed thrombolysis.

Quality Improvement Guidelines for the Treatment of Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis with Use of Endovascular Thrombus Removal

Suresh Vedantham, MD, Akhilesh K. Sista, MD, Seth J. Klein, MD, Lina Nayak, MD, Mahmood K. Razavi, MD, Sanjeeva P. Kalva, MD, Wael E. Saad, MD, Sean R. Dariushnia, MD, Drew M. Caplin, MD, Christine P. Chao, MD, Suvranu Ganguli, MD, T. Gregory Walker, MD, and Boris Nikolic, MD, MBA, for the Society of Interventional Radiology and Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe Standards of Practice Committees

Advances in Deep Vein Thrombosis Management with Thrombolysis

Lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a common disease associated with serious short term and long term complications. Its conventional treatment has been anticoagulation. Thrombolytic treatment has been used for DVT for over 40 years. More recently catheter directed thrombolysis has taken over systemic thrombolysis. This technique is useful to prevent post thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after DVT. In this review article we present a case of DVT thrombolysis in our hospital, look at the pathophysiology of PTS, the mechanism of thrombolysis and the current status of thrombolysis in DVT.

Thrombolytic therapy for deep vein thrombosis

The incorporation of endovascular interventions into mainstream clinical practice for patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has been changing rapidly as a result of four major trends. First, there now is a much greater appreciation among practicing physicians of the major impact of the postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) on DVT patients' late quality of life. Second, there have been rapid advances in the methods by which thrombus can be rapidly removed using endovascular techniques, resulting in greater efficiency and treatment safety. Third, these changes together have spurred a major change in recommended DVT treatment paradigms: there is now published expert consensus that adjunctive endovascular DVT thrombolysis should be strongly considered as a first-line treatment strategy for selected patients with extensive acute proximal DVT. Finally, DVT researchers from multiple subspecialties have finally come together in a major multidisciplinary clinical trial project to subject endovascular DVT thrombolysis to the rigorous scientific testing that is needed for clinicians to be confident in its efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness as a first-line DVT treatment strategy. Pending the results of this and other studies, medical physicians should routinely inform DVT patients about the long-term consequences of DVT; ensure that they understand the importance of anticoagulant therapy and elastic compression stockings in preventing PTS; provide a balanced discussion of the risks, benefits, and uncertainties associated with endovascular DVT thrombolysis to patients with extensive proximal DVT; and develop collaborative clinical and research relationships with physicians experienced with endovascular DVT therapy.

Ultrasound-accelerated Thrombolysis for the Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis: Initial Clinical Experience

To evaluate the success of lysis and clinical outcomes in patients treated with ultrasound (US)-accelerated thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Forty-seven patients with 53 cases of DVT were treated with US-accelerated thrombolysis at eight centers in the United States. Sixty percent of the occlusions were in the lower extremity, 36% were in the upper extremity, and 4% were hepatic. The clot was acute (< or =14 days) in 47% of cases, subacute (15-28 d) in 8%, chronic (>28 d) in 17%, acute-on-chronic in 17%, and not specified in 11%. Patients were treated with urokinase (UK), tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), recombinant plasminogen activator (rPA), or tenecteplase. Complete lysis (> or =90%) was seen in 37 of 53 cases (70%) and overall lysis (complete plus partial) was seen in 48 (91%). No lysis occurred in five cases (9%), four of which were chronic. The median thrombolysis infusion time was 22.0 hours. Major complications (hematoma at site of earlier surgery) occurred in only two patients (3.8%), with no incidence of intracranial or retroperitoneal hemorrhage. US-accelerated thrombolysis exhibited comparable or better lysis with a lower average drug dose and shorter median treatment times than reported in the National Venous Registry and a more recently published study of standard catheter-directed thrombolysis. US-accelerated thrombolysis was shown to be a safe and efficacious treatment for DVT in this multicenter experience. The addition of US reduces total infusion time and provides a greater incidence of complete lysis with a reduction in bleeding rates.

Catheter Directed Thrombolysis for Deep Vein Thrombosis during the First Trimester of Pregnancy: Two Case Reports

Anticoagulation with heparin has been the standard management therapy of deep vein thrombosis during pregnancy. Pregnancy is generally considered as a contraindication for thrombolysis. However, anticoagulation therapy alone does not protect the limbs from post-thrombotic syndrome and venous valve insufficiency. Catheter-directed thrombolysis, combined with angioplasty and stenting, can remove the thrombus and restore patency of the veins, resulting in prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome and valve insufficiency. We report successful catheter-directed thrombolysis and stenting in two early gestation patients with a deep vein thrombosis of the left lower extremity.