Catheter-Directed Therapy Options for Iliofemoral Venous Thrombosis

Quadruple fenestration aortic stent implantation combined with unilateral IBE and internal iliac artery stent implantation for complex abdominal aortic aneurysm: one case report

An abdominal aortic aneurysm is a frequently encountered clinical condition, which necessitates prompt and effective remediation to avoid rupture. Surgeons must meticulously select an appropriate method of repair and assess the long-term surgical prognosis when dealing with patients with complex abdominal aortic aneurysms. In this case report, a 74-year-old man was hospitalized due to acute abdominal pain. Upon further examination, it was discovered that he was suffering from a complex abdominal aortic aneurysm. The thoracoabdominal aorta CTA showed that the aneurysm involved both renal arteries, the part below the kidney was severely twisted, the neck of the aneurysm was short, and it was accompanied by bilateral common iliac and internal iliac aneurysms, and there were considerable thrombus attached to the vessel wall. In this case, our team used 3D technology to simulate the spatial structure of the aneurysm and comprehensively evaluate the patient's condition. Ultimately, we decided to perform a quadruple fenestration aortic stent implantation and endovascular repair of aortic aneurysm, combined with right IBE and internal iliac artery stent implantation, right internal iliac artery reconstruction, and left internal iliac artery aneurysm embolization on this patient. This is an innovative surgical method. The operation was successful and the patient recovered well after the operation.

Invasive and Pharmacological Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis: a Scoping Review

The annual occurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is 300,000-600,000 cases in the United States and 700,000 in Europe. VTE includes deep venous thrombosis (DVT) of upper or lower extremities, superior and inferior vena cava thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism (PE) as well. The primary treatment of DVT includes oral anticoagulation to prevent the progression of the thrombus and decrease the risk of pulmonary embolism. Depending on the symptoms, more invasive treatments can be applied to target the iliofemoral thrombus and its removal. However, less emphasis is given to acute symptomatology, early recovery of function, quality of life improvement, and the individualized likelihood of developing post-thrombotic syndrome. While invasive therapy has been used to enhance the acute management of iliofemoral DVT, our knowledge about the overall outcomes associated with the invasive treatment of VTE is still limited. In this review, we illustrate the available data on pharmacological and endovascular management of iliofemoral VTE, including therapies such as catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), mechanical thrombectomy (PMT), and pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT).

Current Status and Prospect of Stent Placement for May-Thurner Syndrome

Stent implantation has been proven to be safe and has become the first-line intervention for May-Thurner syndrome (MTS), with satisfactory mid-term patency rates and clinical outcomes. Recent research has demonstrated that catheter-directed thrombolysis is the preferred strategy when MTS is combined with deep vein thrombosis after self-expanding stent placement. However, the stent used for the venous system was developed based on the experience obtained in the treatment of arterial disease. Consequently, relatively common corresponding complications may come along later, which include stent displacement, deformation, and obstruction. Different measures such as adopting a stent with a larger diameter, improving stent flexibility, and increasing stent strength have been employed in order to prevent these complications. The ideal venous stent is presently being evaluated and will be introduced in detail in this review.

Anticoagulation Treatment in Venous Thromboembolism: Options and Optimal Duration

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), clinically presenting as deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), constitutes a major global healthcare concern with severe complications, long-term morbidity and mortality. Although several clinical, genetic and acquired risk factors for VTE have been identified, the molecular pathophysiology and mechanisms of disease progression remain poorly understood. Anticoagulation has been the cornerstone of therapy for decades, but there still are uncertainties regarding primary and secondary VTE prevention, as well as optimal therapy duration. In this review we discuss the role of factor Xa in coagulation cascade and the different choices of anticoagulation therapy based on patients' predisposing risk factors and risk of event recurrence. Further, we compare newer agents to traditional anticoagulation treatment, based on most recent studies and guidelines.

Catheter-directed thrombolysis and mechanical intervention in deep venous thrombosis: what is the status after the ATTRACT trial?

Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a major cause of acute and chronic morbidity, mortality, and increased healthcare costs. Endovascular methods for thrombus removal and reestablishing venous patency are increasing in both scope and usage. The most commonly used method for endovascular thrombectomy is catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). Several studies have shown promise for CDT in alleviating acute symptomatology in acute lower extremity DVT as well as mitigating potential long-term consequences of DVT, such as post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). The Acute Venous Thrombosis: Thrombus Removal with Adjunctive Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis (ATTRACT) trial is the largest and most comprehensive randomized-controlled trial to date evaluating CDT compared to anticoagulation alone for the treatment of acute symptomatic proximal lower extremity DVT. This review discusses the current status of CDT and adjunctive endovascular interventions for DVT, particularly in the context of the ATTRACT trial.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiologic Management of Iliofemoral Venous Thrombosis

Iliofemoral venous thrombosis carries a high risk for pulmonary embolism, recurrent deep vein thrombosis, and post-thrombotic syndrome complicating 30% to 71% of those affected. The clinical scenarios in which iliofemoral venous thrombosis is managed may be diverse, presenting a challenge to identify optimum therapy tailored to each situation. Goals for management include preventing morbidity from venous occlusive disease, and morbidity and mortality from pulmonary embolism. Anticoagulation remains the standard of care for iliofemoral venous thrombosis, although a role for more aggressive therapies with catheter-based interventions or surgery exists in select circumstances. Results from recent prospective trials have improved patient selection guidelines for more aggressive therapies, and have also demonstrated a lack of efficacy for certain conservative therapies. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Evaluation of Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy via the AngioJet System Combined with Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for the Treatment of Symptomatic Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Current methods of treating lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LEDVT), such as catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) alone, or percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (PMT) alone, are accompanied by unacceptably high risks of complications. This preliminary retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of CDT combined with PMT (via the AngioJet system), relative to CDT alone, in treating LEDVT.

METHODS

Forty-two patients (43 limbs) with symptomatic deep venous thrombosis received either CDT alone (n = 12) or PMT combined with CDT (PMT + CDT) from May 2012 to December 2016. The groups were compared for clinical outcomes and demographics, LEDVT risk factors, and dosages of urokinase. Thrombus removal, by venographic evidence, was classified as grades I (<50%), II (50 to 99%), or III (>99%).

RESULTS

In the CDT (PMT + CDT) cohorts, grades I, II, and III thrombus removal was achieved by 8% (3%), 17% (10%), and 75% (87%) of patients, respectively. The urokinase dosage and hospitalization required by the CDT group (5.29 ± 0.45 million IU, 20.4 ± 4.6 days) were significantly greater than those required by the PMT + CDT group (4.08 ± 1.15 million IU, 16.0 ± 6.0 days; P = 0.001, 0.039). The clinical outcomes of the 2 groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

Combined PMT and CDT was effective and safe for LEDVT clinical therapy, and hospital stay, urokinase dosage, and complications were less compared with patients who received CDT only.

A case-controlled study on AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy and catheter-directed thrombolysis in the treatment of acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis

Objective

This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy vs. catheter-directed thrombolysis in patients with acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis.

Methods

Between the period of February 2015 and October 2016, 65 patients with documented acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis were treated with catheter-directed intervention. These patients were divided into two groups: AngioJet group and catheter-directed thrombolysis group. Comparisons were made with regard to efficacy and safety between these two groups.

Results

In the AngioJet group, complete or partial thrombus removal was accomplished in 23 (72%) and 3 (9%) patients, respectively. In the catheter-directed thrombolysis group, complete or partial thrombus removal was accomplished in 27 (82%) patients and 1 (3%) patient, respectively. In the AngioJet group, the perimeter difference between the suffered limb and healthy one declined from 5.1 ± 2.3 cm to 1.4 ± 1.2 cm ( P <  0.05). In the catheter-directed thrombolysis group, the perimeter difference declined from 4.7 ± 1.6 cm to 1.5 ± 0.9 cm ( P <  0.05). The mean urokinase dose was 0.264 ± 0.135 million units in the AngioJet group and 1.869 ± 0.528 million units in the catheter-directed thrombolysis group ( P <  0.05). The duration of thrombolysis was 4.2 ± 1.7 h in the AngioJet group and 73.6 ± 18.3 h in the catheter-directed thrombolysis group ( P <  0.05). The occurrence of complications in these two groups was 19% and 18%, respectively (not significant).

Conclusion

AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy is a new, safe and effective approach for treating acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis. When compared to catheter-directed thrombolysis, this treatment provides similar success with lower urokinase dosage and shorter duration of thrombolysis.

Landmark trials in thrombotic vascular disease: a critical appraisal of potential practice-changing trials in 2016-2017

Recent years have witnessed an onslaught of large, multicenter, randomized controlled trials evaluating the prevention and management of thrombotic vascular diseases. While these trials have applied rigorous methodology to pragmatic and clinically relevant questions, several important gaps in knowledge remain. In this review, we critically appraise landmark studies in thrombosis published between 2016 and 2017 that address several ongoing areas of clinical uncertainty. Specifically, we review the role of endovascular therapy in the prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome following acute lower limb deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (ATTRACT trial), the efficacy of edoxaban as the first direct oral anticoagulant used for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (HOKUSAI VTE-Cancer study), whether aspirin can be considered for thromboprophylaxis post-major orthopedic surgery (EPCAT-2 trial), and the need for anticoagulant therapy for treatment of isolated distal DVT (CACTUS trial). Using illustrative cases, we highlight the applicability of these trials to current practice and emphasize the unanswered questions that remain.