Two Different Therapeutic Modalities in the Treatment of the Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: Preliminary Investigation With 20 Case Reports

Management of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: an updated review of the literature

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) represents about 5-10% of all cases of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) with a steadily increasing incidence mostly due to the high prevalence of cancer and frequent use of intravascular devices such as central venous catheters and pacemaker. In primary UEDVT, the venous outflow obstruction and subsequent thrombosis are related to congenital or acquired anatomical abnormalities, whereas secondary UEDVT is often associated with malignancy or indwelling lines. A considerable proportion of patients with UEDVT develops serious complications such as recurrent thrombosis, post-thrombotic syndrome, and pulmonary embolism, therefore timely diagnosis and adequate treatment are of crucial importance. Despite sharing many similarities with lower extremity DVT, UEDVT has distinctive features requiring specific diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. The present review discusses the latest evidence on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of UEDVT, and provides management indications which may help guide clinical decision making.

A review of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

This review aims to describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, presentation, complications, evaluation/diagnosis, and treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT). Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) accounts for 6% of cases of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). It can lead to swelling and discomfort in that extremity and can be complicated by pulmonary embolism, post-thrombotic syndrome, and recurrence of DVT. Evaluation can begin with a dichotomized Constans score and fibrin degradation product testing. Diagnosis is typically made with compression ultrasound. Anticoagulation is the mainstay of therapy. Primary UEDVT is known as Paget Schroetter Syndrome (PSS) which occurs due to venous thoracic outlet syndrome (vTOS). Anticoagulation, thrombolysis, and decompression of the venous thoracic outlet are used for treatment but the optimal strategy remains to be elucidated. Secondary UEDVT are most commonly caused by indwelling catheters and malignancy. There is an ongoing realization that UEDVT are more than simply 'leg clots in the arm.' Given the increasing incidence, research needs to be done to further our understanding of this disease state, its evaluation, and its treatment.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) accounts for 5% of all deep vein thromboses (DVTs). UEDVT may be complicated by post thrombotic syndrome and pulmonary embolism, and early recognition and prompt start of anticoagulant treatment are key. Primary UEDVT, also known as Paget-von Schrötter syndrome, is associated with repeated or sudden physical activity of the upper arm and venous outflow obstruction due to anatomical variations. Secondary UEDVT is often associated with malignancy or use of intravenous devices, such as central venous catheters or pacemaker leads. Although the diagnosis and treatment of UEDVT have many similarities with DVT of the lower extremities, knowledge of specific aspects regarding UEDVT is important to guide optimal management. In this review, we will discuss the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of UEDVT based on the current literature.

Thrombolysis for acute upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

About 5% to 10% of all deep vein thromboses occur in the upper extremities. Serious complications of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis, such as post-thrombotic syndrome and pulmonary embolism, may in theory be avoided using thrombolysis. No systematic review has assessed the effects of thrombolysis for the treatment of individuals with acute upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of thrombolysis for the treatment of individuals with acute upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (29 March 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), and three trial registries (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ISRCTN registry) for ongoing and unpublished studies. We additionally searched the registries of the European Medical Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration (December 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of publication type, publication date and language that investigated the effects of thrombolytics added to anticoagulation, thrombolysis versus anticoagulation, or thrombolysis versus any other type of medical intervention for the treatment of acute upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all records to identify those that met inclusion criteria. We planned to use the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We planned to use trial domains to assess the risks of systematic error (bias) in the trials. We planned to conduct trial sequential analyses to control for the risk of random errors and to assess the robustness of our conclusions. We planned to consider a P value of 0.025 or less as statistically significant. We planned to assess the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Our primary outcomes were severe bleeding, pulmonary embolism, and all-cause mortality.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no trials eligible for inclusion. We also identified no ongoing trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient evidence from which to draw conclusion on the benefits or harms of thrombolysis for the treatment of individuals with acute upper extremity deep vein thrombosis as an add-on therapy to anticoagulation, alone compared with anticoagulation, or alone compared with any other type of medical intervention. Large randomised clinical trials with a low risk of bias are warranted. They should focus on clinical outcomes and not solely on surrogate measures.

Postthrombotic syndrome following upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in children

Upper limb PTS in children depends on DVT pathogenesis (primary vs secondary) and on the age of the patient (neonates vs non-neonates). DVT pathogenesis and thrombus resolution are independent predictors of upper limb PTS in children.

Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

This article addresses the treatment of VTE disease.

METHODS

We generated strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high-quality (Grade A), moderate-quality (Grade B), and low-quality (Grade C) evidence.

RESULTS

For acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend initial parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Grade 1B) or anticoagulation with rivaroxaban. We suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux over IV unfractionated heparin (Grade 2C) or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for PE with hypotension (Grade 2C). For proximal DVT or PE, we recommend treatment of 3 months over shorter periods (Grade 1B). For a first proximal DVT or PE that is provoked by surgery or by a nonsurgical transient risk factor, we recommend 3 months of therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if provoked by a nonsurgical risk factor and low or moderate bleeding risk); that is unprovoked, we suggest extended therapy if bleeding risk is low or moderate (Grade 2B) and recommend 3 months of therapy if bleeding risk is high (Grade 1B); and that is associated with active cancer, we recommend extended therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if high bleeding risk) and suggest LMWH over vitamin K antagonists (Grade 2B). We suggest vitamin K antagonists or LMWH over dabigatran or rivaroxaban (Grade 2B). We suggest compression stockings to prevent the postthrombotic syndrome (Grade 2B). For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we suggest prophylactic-dose fondaparinux or LMWH over no anticoagulation (Grade 2B), and suggest fondaparinux over LMWH (Grade 2C).

CONCLUSION

Strong recommendations apply to most patients, whereas weak recommendations are sensitive to differences among patients, including their preferences.

Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition)

This chapter about treatment for venous thromboembolic disease is part of the American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do or do not outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patient values may lead to different choices (for a full understanding of the grading, see "Grades of Recommendation" chapter). Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following: for patients with objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend anticoagulant therapy with subcutaneous (SC) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), monitored IV, or SC unfractionated heparin (UFH), unmonitored weight-based SC UFH, or SC fondaparinux (all Grade 1A). For patients with a high clinical suspicion of DVT or PE, we recommend treatment with anticoagulants while awaiting the outcome of diagnostic tests (Grade 1C). For patients with confirmed PE, we recommend early evaluation of the risks to benefits of thrombolytic therapy (Grade 1C); for those with hemodynamic compromise, we recommend short-course thrombolytic therapy (Grade 1B); and for those with nonmassive PE, we recommend against the use of thrombolytic therapy (Grade 1B). In acute DVT or PE, we recommend initial treatment with LMWH, UFH or fondaparinux for at least 5 days rather than a shorter period (Grade 1C); and initiation of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) together with LMWH, UFH, or fondaparinux on the first treatment day, and discontinuation of these heparin preparations when the international normalized ratio (INR) is > or = 2.0 for at least 24 h (Grade 1A). For patients with DVT or PE secondary to a transient (reversible) risk factor, we recommend treatment with a VKA for 3 months over treatment for shorter periods (Grade 1A). For patients with unprovoked DVT or PE, we recommend treatment with a VKA for at least 3 months (Grade 1A), and that all patients are then evaluated for the risks to benefits of indefinite therapy (Grade 1C). We recommend indefinite anticoagulant therapy for patients with a first unprovoked proximal DVT or PE and a low risk of bleeding when this is consistent with the patient's preference (Grade 1A), and for most patients with a second unprovoked DVT (Grade 1A). We recommend that the dose of VKA be adjusted to maintain a target INR of 2.5 (INR range, 2.0 to 3.0) for all treatment durations (Grade 1A). We recommend at least 3 months of treatment with LMWH for patients with VTE and cancer (Grade 1A), followed by treatment with LMWH or VKA as long as the cancer is active (Grade 1C). For prevention of postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) after proximal DVT, we recommend use of an elastic compression stocking (Grade 1A). For DVT of the upper extremity, we recommend similar treatment as for DVT of the leg (Grade 1C). Selected patients with lower-extremity (Grade 2B) and upper-extremity (Grade 2C). DVT may be considered for thrombus removal, generally using catheter-based thrombolytic techniques. For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we recommend treatment with prophylactic or intermediate doses of LMWH or intermediate doses of UFH for 4 weeks (Grade 1B).

[Upper limb deep venous thrombosis. Risk factors, outcome, and posthrombotic syndrome]

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was that of describing a series of episodes of upper limb deep venous thrombosis, with special emphasis on the incidence of posthrombotic syndrome and its impact in the quality of life of the patients.

METHODS

33 episodes (29 patients) of upper limb deep venous thrombosis were studied, between January 1995 and January 2002; episodes until September 1999 (18 episodes) were considered retrospectively while those which took place starting in this date (15 episodes) were considered prospectively. In all, 24 patients were cared in hospital clinic. It was possible to obtain complete data in 16 cases, in which evolution toward posthrombotic syndrome, venous revascularization, and impact of the pathological process in the global quality of life of patients were studied.

RESULTS

Average age of patients was 58.9 years. In 25 episodes (75.8%) some risk factor for venous thrombosis existed, the presence of a venous catheter being the most frequent. Subclavian axillary affectation was predominant (18 episodes, 55%) and in the left side (25 episodes, 76%). Twenty-eight episodes were diagnosed with echography (84.8%). Mean D-dimers concentration (N = 16) was 1,046 ng/ml (standard deviation [SD]: 826.9). One of the episodes (3%) was associated to lung thromboembolism. Treatment consisted on the administration of low molecular weight heparin during the acute phase in 70% of the cases. In 13 episodes (39%) additional treatment of thrombosis (endovascular in most) was carried out. In 29 episodes (88%) chronic treatment was administered with acenocoumarol, while in 4 episodes (12%) the administration of low molecular weight heparin was kept. No patient died during hospitalization. In 15 patients (52%) control of revascularizacion was performed. We detected complete revascularization in 6 patients (40%), revascularization with collateral circulation in 4 patients (27%), partial revascularization in other 4 patients (27%) and presence of permeability but with expansion and tortuosity of deep venous system in 1 case (6%). Posthrombotic syndrome was considered mild or nonexistent in 10 patients (62.5%) and moderate in 6 patients (37.5%). Quality of life of patients with moderate posthrombotic syndrome was significantly worse than that of patients with mild posthrombotic syndrome (73 vs 90, p < 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

Most of upper limb deep venous thrombosis are associated to the use of intravenous catheters. Echography is the primary diagnostic technique. At the time of the diagnosis, patients tend to show elevation in D-dimers levels. Evolution toward posthrombotic syndrome is frequent; this syndrome does not use to be serious but indeed influences the quality of life of patients.

Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy

This chapter about antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease is part of the seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy: Evidence Based Guidelines. Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do, or do not, outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patients' values may lead to different choices (for a full understanding of the grading see Guyatt et al, CHEST 2004; 126:179S-187S). Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following: for patients with objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), we recommend short-term treatment with subcutaneous (SC) low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or, alternatively, IV unfractionated heparin (UFH) [both Grade 1A]. For patients with a high clinical suspicion of DVT, we recommend treatment with anticoagulants while awaiting the outcome of diagnostic tests (Grade 1C+). In acute DVT, we recommend initial treatment with LMWH or UFH for at least 5 days (Grade 1C), initiation of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) together with LMWH or UFH on the first treatment day, and discontinuation of heparin when the international normalized ratio (INR) is stable and > 2.0 (Grade 1A). For the duration and intensity of treatment for acute DVT of the leg, the recommendations include the following: for patients with a first episode of DVT secondary to a transient (reversible) risk factor, we recommend long-term treatment with a VKA for 3 months over treatment for shorter periods (Grade 1A). For patients with a first episode of idiopathic DVT, we recommend treatment with a VKA for at least 6 to 12 months (Grade 1A). We recommend that the dose of VKA be adjusted to maintain a target INR of 2.5 (INR range, 2.0 to 3.0) for all treatment durations (Grade 1A). We recommend against high-intensity VKA therapy (INR range, 3.1 to 4.0) [Grade 1A] and against low-intensity therapy (INR range, 1.5 to 1.9) compared to INR range of 2.0 to 3.0 (Grade 1A). For the prevention of the postthrombotic syndrome, we recommend the use of an elastic compression stocking (Grade 1A). For patients with objectively confirmed nonmassive PE, we recommend acute treatment with SC LMWH or, alternatively, IV UFH (both Grade 1A). For most patients with pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend clinicians not use systemic thrombolytic therapy (Grade 1A). For the duration and intensity of treatment for PE, the recommendations are similar to those for DVT.