Thromboembolic Risk of Endovascular Intervention for Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis

Lindsey, Philip; Echeverría, Ángela; Poi, Mun J.; Kfoury, Elias; Bechara, Carlos F.; Lin, Peter H.

doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2017.06.026

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were significantly more cancers in the PMT group which added a deep-vein thrombosis risk factor. In the literature 3% to 36% cancers were found after acute procedure (16,17,(25)(26)(27) and for recanalization-stenting in chronic obstruction, the rate of cancer context ranged from 0 to 6% without specifying the disease activity at the time of recanalization (10,12,28). The small interval between diagnosis of DVT and acute procedure may explain this higher frequency since there is a limited time to perform oncological explorations.…”

Section: Clinical Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Gautier¹,

Douane²,

David³

et al. 2022

Quant Imaging Med Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: 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. Methods: 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).Results: 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).Conclusions: 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.

show abstract