Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is responsible for the hospitalization of >250 000 Americans annually and represents a significant risk for morbidity and mortality. Despite the publication of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to aid in the management of VTE in its acute and chronic forms, the clinician is frequently confronted with manifestations of VTE for which data are sparse and optimal management is unclear. In particular, the optimal use of advanced therapies for acute VTE, including thrombolysis and catheter-based therapies, remains uncertain. This report addresses the management of massive and submassive pulmonary embolism (PE), iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (IFDVT),and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). The goal is to provide practical advice to enable the busy clinician to optimize the management of patients with these severe manifestations of VTE. Although this document makes recommendations for management, optimal medical decisions must incorporate other factors, including patient wishes, quality of life, and life expectancy based on age and comorbidities. The appropriateness of these recommendations for a specific patient may vary depending on these factors and will be best judged by the bedside clinician.

Intima-media thickness (IMT) provides a surrogate end point of cardiovascular outcomes in clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of cardiovascular risk factor modification. Carotid artery plaque further adds to the cardiovascular risk assessment. It is defined as a focal structure that encroaches into the arterial lumen of at least 0.5 mm or 50% of the surrounding IMT value or demonstrates a thickness >1.5 mm as measured from the media-adventitia interface to the intima-lumen interface. The scientific basis for use of IMT in clinical trials and practice includes ultrasound physics, technical and disease-related principles as well as best practice on the performance, interpretation and documentation of study results. Comparison of IMT results obtained from epidemiological and interventional studies around the world relies on harmonization on approaches to carotid image acquisition and analysis. This updated consensus document delineates further criteria to distinguish early atherosclerotic plaque formation from thickening of IMT. Standardized methods will foster homogenous data collection and analysis, improve the power of randomized clinical trials incorporating IMT and plaque measurements and facilitate the merging of large databases for meta-analyses. IMT results are applied to individual patients as an integrated assessment of cardiovascular risk factors. However, this document recommends against serial monitoring in individual patients.

Among patients with severe carotid-artery stenosis and coexisting conditions, carotid stenting with the use of an emboli-protection device is not inferior to carotid endarterectomy.

Intima-media thickness (IMT) is increasingly used as a surrogate end point of vascular outcomes in clinical trials aimed at determining the success of interventions that lower risk factors for atherosclerosis and associated diseases (stroke, myocardial infarction and peripheral artery diseases). The necessity to promote further criteria to distinguish early atherosclerotic plaque formation from thickening of IMT and to standardize IMT measurements is expressed through this updated consensus. Plaque is defined as a focal structure that encroaches into the arterial lumen of at least 0.5 mm or 50% of the surrounding IMT value or demonstrates a thickness >1.5 mm as measured from the media-adventitia interface to the intima-lumen interface. Standard use of IMT measurements is based on physics, technical and disease-related principles as well as agreements on how to perform, interpret and document study results. Harmonization of carotid image acquisition and analysis is needed for the comparison of the IMT results obtained from epidemiological and interventional studies around the world. The consensus concludes that there is no need to ‘treat IMT values’ nor to monitor IMT values in individual patients apart from exceptions named, which emphasize that inside randomized clinical trials should be performed. Although IMT has been suggested to represent an important risk marker, according to the current evidence it does not fulfill the characteristics of an accepted risk factor. Standardized methods recommended in this consensus statement will foster homogenous data collection and analysis. This will help to improve the power of randomized clinical trials incorporating IMT measurements and to facilitate the merging of large databases for meta-analyses.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), occurs in ∼1 to 2 individuals per 1000 each year, corresponding to ∼300 000 to 600 000 events in the United States annually. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about treatment of VTE. Methods: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and adult patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. Results: The panel agreed on 28 recommendations for the initial management of VTE, primary treatment, secondary prevention, and treatment of recurrent VTE events. Conclusions: Strong recommendations include the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE and hemodynamic compromise, use of an international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 over a lower INR range for patients with VTE who use a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for secondary prevention, and use of indefinite anticoagulation for patients with recurrent unprovoked VTE. Conditional recommendations include the preference for home treatment over hospital-based treatment for uncomplicated DVT and PE at low risk for complications and a preference for direct oral anticoagulants over VKA for primary treatment of VTE.

Ultrasound-facilitated, catheter-directed, low-dose fibrinolysis decreased RV dilation, reduced pulmonary hypertension, decreased anatomic thrombus burden, and minimized intracranial hemorrhage in patients with acute massive and submassive PE. (A Prospective, Single-arm, Multi-center Trial of EkoSonic® Endovascular System and Activase for Treatment of Acute Pulmonary Embolism (PE) [SEATTLE II]; NCT01513759).

BACKGROUND The post-thrombotic syndrome frequently develops in patients with proximal deep-vein thrombosis despite treatment with anticoagulant therapy. Pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (hereafter “pharmacomechanical thrombolysis”) rapidly removes thrombus and is hypothesized to reduce the risk of the post-thrombotic syndrome. METHODS We randomly assigned 692 patients with acute proximal deep-vein thrombosis to receive either anticoagulation alone (control group) or anticoagulation plus pharmacomechanical thrombolysis (catheter-mediated or device-mediated intrathrombus delivery of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and thrombus aspiration or maceration, with or without stenting). The primary outcome was development of the post-thrombotic syndrome between 6 and 24 months of follow-up. RESULTS Between 6 and 24 months, there was no significant between-group difference in the percentage of patients with the post-thrombotic syndrome (47% in the pharmacomechanical-thrombolysis group and 48% in the control group; risk ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.11; P = 0.56). Pharmacomechanical thrombolysis led to more major bleeding events within 10 days (1.7% vs. 0.3% of patients, P = 0.049), but no significant difference in recurrent venous thromboembolism was seen over the 24-month follow-up period (12% in the pharmacomechanical-thrombolysis group and 8% in the control group, P = 0.09). Moderate-to-severe post-thrombotic syndrome occurred in 18% of patients in the pharmacomechanical-thrombolysis group versus 24% of those in the control group (risk ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.98; P = 0.04). Severity scores for the post-thrombotic syndrome were lower in the pharmacomechanical-thrombolysis group than in the control group at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months of follow-up (P<0.01 for the comparison of the Villalta scores at each time point), but the improvement in quality of life from baseline to 24 months did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with acute proximal deep-vein thrombosis, the addition of pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis to anticoagulation did not result in a lower risk of the post-thrombotic syndrome but did result in a higher risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ATTRACT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00790335.)

BACKGROUND Atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis is a common problem in the elderly. Despite two randomized trials that did not show a benefit of renal-artery stenting with respect to kidney function, the usefulness of stenting for the prevention of major adverse renal and cardiovascular events is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 947 participants who had atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and either systolic hypertension while taking two or more antihypertensive drugs or chronic kidney disease to medical therapy plus renal-artery stenting or medical therapy alone. Participants were followed for the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular and renal events (a composite end point of death from cardiovascular or renal causes, myocar-dial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for congestive heart failure, progressive renal insufficiency, or the need for renal-replacement therapy). RESULTS Over a median follow-up period of 43 months (interquartile range, 31 to 55), the rate of the primary composite end point did not differ significantly between participants who underwent stenting in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone (35.1% and 35.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.17; P = 0.58). There were also no significant differences between the treatment groups in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. During follow-up, there was a consistent modest difference in systolic blood pressure favoring the stent group (−2.3 mm Hg; 95% CI, −4.4 to −0.2; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Renal-artery stenting did not confer a significant benefit with respect to the prevention of clinical events when added to comprehensive, multifactorial medical therapy in people with atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and hypertension or chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00081731.)