Catheter-directed thrombolysis for acute DVT

Diagnosis and treatment of iliac vein stenosis

Stenosis of the iliac veins is common in patients with chronic venous insufficiency. The article describes the methods for the diagnosis and treatment of iliac vein stenosis. The causes of iliac vein stenosis include extravasal compression or the consequences of ileofemoral thrombosis. Stenosis of the iliac veins exists in 1/4 of the entire adult population, but clinical manifestations do not occur in all patients. Stenosis of the iliac veins should be considered in case of an unknown edema, more often in the left lower extremity, since venous duplex ultrasound of lower extremities is not sensitive and specific enough when examining the veins above the inguinal ligament. The most accurate diagnostic method is intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) but the appeared computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) with high-quality images have become a good replacement for IVUS. The main method of treatment of iliac vein stenosis, besides stenting, isindispensable drug therapy consisting of antithrombotic and phlebotonic drugs.

Pharmacomechanical Thrombectomy Versus Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

Early catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) can reduce postthrombotic morbidity. Pharmacomechanical thrombolysis (PMT) is a new therapy that can be selected for the treatment of iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (IFDVT). We performed a meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing PMT versus CDT for treatment of acute IFDVT. Literature on this topic published between January 1, 1990, and June 1, 2018, was identified using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Six trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to CDT, PMT significantly reduced the Villalta score ( P = .007; I² = 0%), thrombus score ( P = .01; I² = 0%), the duration in the hospital ( P = .03; I² = 64%), and thrombolysis time ( P < .00001, I² = 0%). There was no significant difference in valvular incompetence events ( P = .21; I² = 0%), minor bleeding events ( P = .59; I² = 0%), stent events ( P = .09; I² = 24%), and clot reduction grade I events ( P = .16; I² = 43%) between PMT and CDT. Subgroup analysis was performed by dividing the clot reduction grade I events group into PMT plus CDT versus CDT group and significant differences were found ( P = .03, I² = 0%) as well as for PMT alone versus CDT group ( P = .88, I² = 37%). This meta-analysis shows that PMT reduces the severity of postthrombotic syndrome (PTS), thrombus score, duration in hospital, and thrombolysis time compared to CDT. More specifically, PMT plus CDT reduces clot reduction grade I events. No significant difference in valvular incompetence events, stent events, and minor bleeding events were found when PMT was compared to CDT.

Iliac vein compression: epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment

Iliac vein compression (LIVC) is a prevalent finding in the general population, but a smaller number of patients are symptomatic. ILVC should be considered in symptomatic patients with unexplained unilateral lower leg swelling. Patients typically complain of one or more of the following symptoms: lower leg pain, heaviness, venous claudication, swelling, hyperpigmentation and ulceration. ILVC can be thrombotic, combined with acute or chronic DVT, or non-thrombotic. ILVC is best diagnosed with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), but computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) have emerged as valid screening tests. Venography underestimates the severity of ILVC but may provide insights into the anatomy and the presence of collaterals. Based on current available evidence, endovascular therapy with stenting remains the main treatment strategy for ILVC. Dedicated nitinol venous stents are currently under review by the Food and Drug Administration for potential approval in the United States. These stents have been released outside the US. There is no consensus to the optimal anticoagulation regimen post-ILVC stenting. Oral anticoagulants, however, remain a preferred therapy in patients with history of thrombotic ILVC.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/InSwn2AebNY

Consensus among Chinese experts on standard interventional therapy for deep venous thrombosis of lower extremity (second edition)

This is an update on the first edition of the expert consensus. This document discusses the indications and contraindications of interventional treatment methods for deep venous thrombosis such as anticoagulation, catheter-directed thrombolysis, percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stent implantation. The operational procedures, considerations, preoperative management, and prevention of complications were also updated, supplemented, and revised. Emphasis is placed on the interventional treatment of acute and subacute deep venous thrombosis to effectively reduce the incidence of post-thrombosis syndrome.

Catheter-directed thrombolysis of deep vein thrombosis: literature review and practice considerations

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a major health problem worldwide. The risk of pulmonary embolism following DVT is well established, but the long-term vascular sequelae of DVT are often underappreciated, costly to manage, and can have extremely detrimental effects on quality of life. Treatment of DVT classically involves oral anticoagulation, which reduces the risk of pulmonary embolism but does not remove the clot. Anticoagulation therefore does little to prevent the venous damage and scarring that occurs following DVT, leaving the patient at risk for permanent venous insufficiency and development of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) is a minimally invasive endovascular treatment that is used as an adjunct to anticoagulation. CDT lowers the risk of PTS by reducing clot burden and protecting against valvular damage. A catheter is advanced directly to the site of thrombosis under fluoroscopy followed by a slow, prolonged infusion of a relatively low dose of thrombolytic agent. CDT restores venous patency faster than anticoagulation, which hastens the relief of acute symptoms. Adjunctive CDT modalities have become increasingly popular among interventional radiologists, allowing for additional mechanical thrombectomy or ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis at the time of catheter placement. These pharmacomechanical CDT (PCDT) techniques have the potential to reduce treatment time and associated healthcare costs. Numerous observational and retrospective studies have consistently shown a benefit of CDT plus anticoagulation over anticoagulation alone for prevention of PTS. Patients with long life expectancy and acute thrombosis involving the iliac and proximal femoral veins (iliofemoral DVT) have the greatest benefit from CDT, which may decrease the risk of PTS and/or decrease the severity of PTS symptoms if they do occur. Randomized controlled trials remain limited but generally support the observational data. CDT also plays an important role in those with acute limb-threatening venous occlusion or severe symptoms from DVT. Although adverse outcomes are rare, a potential devastating outcome is intracranial bleeding. While the available literature suggests the risk of serious morbidity from bleeding is quite rare, the absolute risk of bleeding is not clear and will require outcomes data from randomized trials. Future studies should also examine the cost-effectiveness of CDT for PTS prevention, particularly with respect to quality-adjusted life years, and compare the effectiveness of available PCDT devices.

Pathogenesis of Thromboembolism and Endovascular Management

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), a disease that includes deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is associated with high mortality, morbidity, and costs. It can result in long-term complications that include postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) adding to its morbidity. VTE affects 1/1000 patients, costs $13.5 billion annually to treat, and claims 100,000 lives annually in the US. The current standard of care for VTE is anticoagulation, though thrombolysis may be performed in patients with PE and threatened limb. This review discusses pathogenesis and medical treatment of VTE and then focuses on endovascular treatment modalities. Mechanical- and catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) is discussed, as well as patient selection criteria, and complications. The first prospective study (CaVenT) comparing CDT with anticoagulation alone in acute DVT, despite study shortcomings, corroborates the existing literature indicating improved outcomes with CDT. The potential of the ongoing prospective, multicenter, randomized ATTRACT trial is also highlighted.

Post-thrombotic syndrome after catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis (CaVenT): 5-year follow-up results of an open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Post-thrombotic syndrome is a common complication after acute proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and is associated with reduced quality of life and a substantial cost burden. In the 2-year results of the CaVenT study, additional catheter-directed thrombolysis reduced the risk of post-thrombotic syndrome by 14% compared with conventional therapy, but did not affect quality of life. In this study we report results at the 5-year follow-up, aiming to assess whether findings for post-thrombotic syndrome and quality of life have persisted.

METHODS

Between Jan 3, 2006, and Dec 22, 2009, we recruited patients aged 18-75 years with a first-time high proximal leg DVT from 20 hospitals in the Norwegian southeastern health region. With sealed envelopes, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard treatment with compression stockings and anticoagulants (control group) or to standard treatment plus catheter-directed thrombolysis with alteplase within 21 days from symptom onset. Pre-specified outcomes in this analysis were post-thrombotic syndrome at 5 years as assessed with the Villalta score and scores for quality of life at 5 years with EQ-5D and the disease-specific VEINES-QOL/Sym. Analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00251771.

FINDINGS

At 5 year follow-up (last date Oct 14, 2014), data were available for 176 patients (84% of the 209 patients originally randomised)--87 originally assigned to catheter-directed thrombolysis and 89 originally assigned to the control group. 37 patients (43%; 95% CI 33-53) allocated to catheter-directed thrombolysis developed post-thrombotic syndrome, compared with 63 (71%; 95% CI 61-79) allocated to the control group (p<0·0001), corresponding to an absolute risk reduction of 28% (95% CI 14-42) and a number needed to treat of 4 (95% CI 2-7). Four (5%) patients assigned to catheter-directed thrombolysis and one (1%) to standard treatment had severe post-thrombotic syndrome (Villalta score ≥ 15 or presence of an ulcer). Quality-of-life scores with either assessment scale did not differ between the treatment groups.

INTERPRETATION

Additional catheter-directed thrombolysis resulted in a persistent and increased clinical benefit during follow-up for up to 5 years, supporting the use of additional catheter-directed thrombolysis in patients with extensive proximal DVT. However, allocation to this therapy did not lead to better quality of life. The optimal endovascular thrombolytic approach needs further investigation.

FUNDING

Southeastern Norway Regional Health Authority, the Research Council of Norway, University of Oslo, Oslo University Hospital.

Interventionelle Therapie einer deszendierenden Beckenvenenthrombose bei einer jungen Frau

Wir schildern den Fall einer 15-jährigen Patientin mit deszendierender Beckenvenenthrombose des linken Beines bei einer ilio-cavalen Gefäßanomalie, bei der nach zunächst frustraner Thrombektomie in einem zweiten Schritt, dann in einem spezialisierten Zentrum, eine kombinierte Behandlung im Sinne einer Spätthrombektomie mit lokoregionärer Thrombolyse, AV-Fistelanlage und Stentim-plantation durchgeführt wurde. Im Langzeitverlauf ist die Patientin beschwerdefrei ohne klinische oder meßtechnische Zeichen eines postthrombotischen Syndroms.

Die Möglichkeit einer interventionellen Therapie proximaler Thrombosen sollte insbesondere bei jüngeren Patienten häufiger als heute üblich in Erwägung gezogen werden. Dabei sollte immer an die Möglichkeit von Gefäßanomalien und anatomischen Varian-ten gedacht und eine entsprechend subtile Diagnostik präinterventionell vorgenommen werden. Nach den derzeitigen Empfehlungen kommt in etwa zwei Drittel der Fälle solcher Thrombosen eine restitutive Therapie in Betracht.

Health-related quality of life after catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis: secondary outcomes of the randomised, non-blinded, parallel-group CaVenT study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether additional catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) improves long-term quality of life (QOL) compared with standard treatment with anticoagulation and compression stockings alone in patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

DESIGN

Open-label randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

19 Hospitals in the Norwegian southeastern health region.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (18-75 years) with a high proximal DVT, symptoms <21 days and no increased risk of bleeding were eligible. 189 of 209 recruited patients completed 24 months of follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised to additional CDT with alteplase for 1-4 days or to standard treatment only with 6 months of anticoagulation and 24 months of compression stockings.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Planned secondary outcome measures included QOL as assessed with the generic instrument EQ-5D and the disease-specific instrument VEINES-QOL/Sym. Primary outcome measure was post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after 24 months.

RESULTS

After 24 months there were no differences in QOL between the additional CDT and standard treatment arms; mean difference for the EQ-5D index was 0.04 (95% CI -0.10 to 0.17), for the VEINES-QOL score 0.2 (95% CI -2.8 to 3.0) and for the VEINES-Sym score 0.5 (95% CI -2.4 to 3.4; p values>0.37). Independent of treatment arms, patients with PTS had poorer outcomes than patient without PTS; mean difference for EQ-5D was 0.09 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.15), for VEINES-QOL score 8.6 (95% CI 5.9 to 11.2) and for VEINES-Sym score 9.8 (95% CI 7.3 to 12.3; p values<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

QOL did not differ between patients treated with additional CDT compared with standard treatment alone. Patients who developed PTS reported poorer QOL and more symptoms than patients without PTS. QOL should be included as an outcome measure in clinical studies on patients at risk of PTS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00251771.

Cost-effectiveness of additional catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Additional treatment with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) has recently been shown to reduce post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS).

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the cost effectiveness of additional CDT compared with standard treatment alone.

METHODS

Using a Markov decision model, we compared the two treatment strategies in patients with a high proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and a low risk of bleeding. The model captured the development of PTS, recurrent venous thromboembolism and treatment-related adverse events within a lifetime horizon and the perspective of a third-party payer. Uncertainty was assessed with one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyzes. Model inputs from the CaVenT study included PTS development, major bleeding from CDT and utilities for post DVT states including PTS. The remaining clinical inputs were obtained from the literature. Costs obtained from the CaVenT study, hospital accounts and the literature are expressed in US dollars ($); effects in quality adjusted life years (QALY).

RESULTS

In base case analyzes, additional CDT accumulated 32.31 QALYs compared with 31.68 QALYs after standard treatment alone. Direct medical costs were $64,709 for additional CDT and $51,866 for standard treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $20,429/QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analysis showed model sensitivity to the clinical efficacy of both strategies, but the ICER remained < $55,000/QALY over the full range of all parameters. The probability that CDT is cost effective was 82% at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000/QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional CDT is likely to be a cost-effective alternative to the standard treatment for patients with a high proximal DVT and a low risk of bleeding.

Early re-presentations and the potential role of catheter-directed thrombolysis in patients diagnosed with a lower limb deep vein thrombosis: a single-centre experience

Introduction

Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) restores venous patency, reduces the risk of the post-thrombotic syndrome and may reduce longer term treatment costs. This study assessed the potential role of CDT in patients with DVT with regard to representation following the index event.

Methods

A retrospective review of all patients with a positive lower limb DVT scan. Potential suitability of each patient to undergo CDT was based on well-recognized inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Results

In total, 1689 patients underwent a DVT-specific lower limb venous duplex. A total of 269 were found to have a DVT. Fifty-three of these patients met the inclusion criteria for CDT (only 2 underwent CDT). Fifty-nine of the 269 patients with an index DVT re-presented to our institution with a venous thromboembolism-related clinical event. These patients were significantly younger than those who did not reattend. A higher proportion of patients who represented were deemed suitable for CDT for the index DVT compared with those who did not represent (17/59 versus 36/210; P = 0.04).

Conclusion

This pragmatic study highlights the fact that significant number of patients return to secondary care with actual/perceived complications following initial diagnosis and treatment of a DVT which may have been amenable to CDT.