Meta-analysis and systematic review of interventional therapy versus anticoagulation for isolated femoropopliteal deep venous thrombosis

Eckenrode, Gregory; Nelson, Becky Baltich; Belarmino, Andre; Chen, Stephanie Ashley; Goel, Shokhi; Meltzer, Andrew J.

doi:10.1016/j.jvsv.2018.10.017

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified other systematic reviews which aimed to evaluate the effects of stenting or angioplasty for the treatment of DVT, but they had significant methodological differences when compared to this work: [46][47][48][49][50][51] they used limited or repeated databases, they used language or date of publication limits, they considered a heterogeneous source of evidence merging retrospective and prospective studies, case series and non-randomized studies to base their conclusions, they used outdated risk of bias assessment tools (e.g. Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale), and few of them used a GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stenting or angioplasty for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although the cornerstone treatment for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) remains anticoagulation, clinicians perform stenting or angioplasty (SA) in particular patients. To assess the effects of SA in this setting, we performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Methods: Based on the Cochrane standards, we searched the Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS and IBECS databases, and trial registries. Our primary outcomes were post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), venous thromboembolism (VTE) and all-cause mortality.Results: We included 7 randomized controlled trial (1485 participants). There was no clinically significant difference between SA and best medical practice (BMP) for the additional treatment of acute DVT regarding PTS (standardized mean difference −7.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] −12.13 to −3.61; very low-certainty) and VTE (risk ratio [RR] 1.19, 95% CI 0.28-5.07, very low-certainty), and no deaths. Compared to BMP, the SA plus BMP and thrombolysis results in little to no difference in PTS (mean difference [MD] −1.07, 95% CI −1.12 to −1.02, moderate-certainty), VTE (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.95-2.31, low-certainty), and mortality (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.34-2.52, low-certainty). There was no clinical difference between stenting and BMP for chronic DVT regarding PTS (MD 2.73, 95% CI −2.10 to 7.56, very low certainty) and no VTE and death events.Conclusions: SA results in little to no difference in PTS, VTE and mortality in acute DVT compared to BMP. The evidence regarding SA in chronic DVT and whether SA, compared to BMP and thrombolysis, decreases PTS and VTE in acute DVT is uncertain. Open Science Framework (osf.io/f2dm6

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stenting or angioplasty for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Treatment options for DVT are very limited. Systemic anticoagulation is the mainstay for DVT treatment which can prevent new thrombus formation and decrease the risk of pulmonary embolism, however, it is closely associated with an increased risk of bleeding and PTS [6,7]. Hence, it is imperative to further understand the potential mechanism of DVT to improve the treatment of the disease.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uvaol alleviates oxidative stress induced human umbilical vein endothelial cell injury by suppressing mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway

Pan,

Tan,

Meng

et al. 2024

Blood Coagulation &Amp; Fibrinolysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a potentially life-threatening disorder with high morbidity. Uvaol is a natural pentacyclic triterpene possessing multiple pharmacological activities. Nevertheless, the role of uvaol in DVT is unclarified. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) were treated with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) to mimic DVT in vitro. CCK-8 assay and flow cytometry were utilized for measuring cell viability and apoptosis, respectively. Levels of the cell injury marker, thrombosis-associated factors, inflammatory cytokines, and oxidative stress-related markers were examined by commercial assay kits. Western blotting was used for evaluating the expression of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling-associated proteins. Uvaol treatment attenuated H2O2-induced HUVEC apoptosis and injury. Uvaol reduced the expression of pro-thrombotic factors and inflammatory cytokines and attenuated oxidative stress in H2O2-stimulated HUVECs. Uvaol inhibited MAPK signaling pathway in H2O2-stimulated HUVECs. Activating MAPK signaling reversed uvaol-mediated protective effects on H2O2-treated HUVECs. Uvaol treatment alleviates H2O2-induced HUVEC injury, apoptosis, and oxidative stress by inactivating MAPK signaling.

show abstract

“…In our study, it was safe and effective to use a comprehensive treatment scheme to treat lower limb DVT, and the patients had no significant serious complications. [17][18][19] With the development of interventional technology, multiple interventional thrombolytic therapies will be used together to restore venous patency and accelerate the thrombolytic process and effect, which is the future trend of interventional thrombolysis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Observation of Uninterrupted Thrombolytic Therapy via Indwelling Catheter for Lower Limb Deep Vein Thrombosis

Liu¹,

Wang²,

Zhang³

et al. 2023

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Observe uninterrupted thrombolytic therapy via indwelling catheter for lower limb deep vein thrombosis. Methods We retrospectively studied data from 32 patients with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis who received comprehensive treatment, consisting of general treatment, inferior vena cava filter implantation, interventional thrombolysis, angioplasty, stenting, and post-operative monitoring. Results The efficacy and safety of the comprehensive treatment were observed for a follow-up period of 6–12 months. The treatment was 100% effective; patient results indicated no serious bleeding, acute pulmonary embolism, or death after surgery. Conclusion The combination of intravenous and healthy side femoral vein puncture and directed thrombolysis to treat acute lower limb deep vein thrombosis is safe, effective, and minimally invasive while still achieving a good therapeutic effect.

show abstract

Meta-analysis and systematic review of interventional therapy versus anticoagulation for isolated femoropopliteal deep venous thrombosis

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

Stenting or angioplasty for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Stenting or angioplasty for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Uvaol alleviates oxidative stress induced human umbilical vein endothelial cell injury by suppressing mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway

Clinical Observation of Uninterrupted Thrombolytic Therapy via Indwelling Catheter for Lower Limb Deep Vein Thrombosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About