Prospective randomised comparative study of pulse spray and conventional local thrombolysis

Infusion techniques for peripheral arterial thrombolysis

BACKGROUND

Acute limb ischaemia usually is caused by a blood clot blocking an artery or a bypass graft. Severe acute ischaemia will lead to irreversible damage to muscles and nerves if blood flow is not restored in a few hours. Once irreversible damage occurs, amputation will be necessary and the condition can be life-threatening. Infusion of clot-busting drugs (thrombolysis) is a useful tool in the management of acute limb ischaemia. Fibrinolytic drugs are used to disperse blood clots (thrombi) to clear arterial occlusion and restore blood flow. Thrombolysis is less invasive than surgery. A variety of techniques are used to deliver fibrinolytic agents. This is an update of a review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of infusion techniques during peripheral arterial thrombolysis for treatment of patients with acute limb ischaemia.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registries to 20 October 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing infusion techniques for fibrinolytic agents in the treatment of acute limb ischaemia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane. We assessed the risk of bias in included trials using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We evaluated certainty of evidence using GRADE. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the odds ratio (OR) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We were not able to carry out meta-analyses due to clinical heterogeneity, so we have reported the results and performed the comparisons narratively. The main outcomes of interest were amputation-free survival or limb salvage, amputation, mortality, vessel patency, duration of thrombolysis, and complications such as cerebrovascular accident and major and minor bleeding.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies with a total of 671 participants are included in this update. Trials covered a variety of infusion techniques, dosage regimens, and adjunctive agents. We grouped trials according to types of techniques assessed (e.g. intravenous and intra-arterial delivery of the agent, 'high-' and 'low-dose' regimens of the agent, continuous infusion and 'forced infusion' of the agent, use of adjunctive antiplatelet agents). We assessed the certainty of evidence as very low to low due to the limited power of individual studies to deliver clinically relevant results, small and heterogeneous study populations, use of different inclusion criteria by each study in terms of severity and duration of ischaemia, considerably different outcome measures between trials, and use of different fibrinolytic agents. This heterogeneity prevented pooling of data in meta-analyses. No regimen has been shown to confer benefit in terms of amputation-free survival (at 30 days), amputation, or death. For vessel patency, complete success was more likely with intra-arterial (IA) than with intravenous (IV) infusion (odds ratio (OR) 13.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.79 to 62.67; 1 study, 40 participants; low-certainty evidence); radiological failure may be more likely with IV infusion (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38; 1 study, 40 participants; low-certainty evidence). Due to the small numbers involved in each arm and design differences between arms, it is not possible to conclude whether any technique offered any advantage over another. None of the treatment strategies clearly affected complications such as cerebrovascular accident or major bleeding requiring surgery or blood transfusion. Minor bleeding complications were more frequent in systemic (intravenous) therapy compared to intra-arterial infusion (OR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.56; 1 study, 40 participants), and in high-dose compared to low-dose therapy (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.96; 1 study, 63 participants). Limited evidence from individual trials appears to indicate that high-dose and forced-infusion regimens reduce the duration of thrombolysis. In one trial, the median duration of infusion was 4 hours (range 0.25 to 46) for the high-dose group and 20 hours (range 2 to 46) for the low-dose group. In a second trial, treatment using pulse spray was continued for a median of 120 minutes (range 40 to 310) compared with low-dose infusion for a median of 25 hours (range 2 to 60). In a third trial, the median duration of therapy was reduced with pulse spray at 195 minutes (range 90 to 1260 minutes) compared to continuous infusion at 1390 minutes (range 300 to 2400 minutes). However, none of the studies individually showed improvement in limb salvage at 30 days nor benefit for the amputation rate related to the technique of drug delivery. Similarly, no studies reported a clear difference in occurrence of cerebrovascular accident or major bleeding. Although 'high-dose' and 'forced-infusion' techniques achieved vessel patency in less time than 'low-dose' infusion, more minor bleeding complications may be associated (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.96; 1 study, 72 participants; and OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.32; 1 study, 121 participants, respectively). Use of adjunctive platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists did not improve outcomes, and results were limited by inclusion of participants with non-limb-threatening ischaemia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to show that any thrombolytic regimen provides a benefit over any other in terms of amputation-free survival, amputation, or 30-day mortality. The rate of CVA or major bleeding requiring surgery or blood transfusion did not clearly differ between regimens but may occur more frequently in high dose and IV regimens. This evidence was limited and of very low certainty. Minor bleeding may be more common with high-dose and IV regimens. In this context, thrombolysis may be an acceptable therapy for patients with marginally threatened limbs (Rutherford grade IIa) compared with surgery. Caution is advised for patients who do not have limb-threatening ischaemia (Rutherford grade I) because of risks of major haemorrhage, cerebrovascular accident, and death from thrombolysis.

Do randomized trials of thrombolysis versus open revascularization still apply to current management: what has changed?

Several randomized trials of catheter-directed thrombolysis versus operative revascularization in patients with acute lower extremity ischemia were performed in the mid-1990 s. Although the outcomes of these trials were not definitive, they did provide insight into potential uses and techniques of catheter-directed thrombolysis and lytic agents. This article reviews the outcomes of these randomized trials and describes advances in thrombolytic techniques and technology, including percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy devices and innovative catheter designs that accelerate lysis and the development of direct-acting lytic agents.

Infusion techniques for peripheral arterial thrombolysis

BACKGROUND

Thrombolytic therapy is a useful tool in the management of acute peripheral arterial ischaemia. Fibrinolytic drugs are used to disperse blood clot to clear arterial occlusion. A variety of techniques are used to deliver these agents.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the optimal technique for infusion of fibrinolytic drugs in peripheral arterial ischaemia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Library (issue 3, 2003) and the Specialised Trials Register of the Cochrane Review Group on Peripheral Vascular Diseases (July 2003) were searched. Proceedings from meetings of British, European and North American Vascular Surgical and Radiological Societies, plus reference lists of identified studies were also searched for relevant trials. Major pharmaceutical firms and trialists were asked about unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two reviewers independently selected randomised controlled trials comparing infusion techniques of fibrinolytic agents in the treatment of acute peripheral arterial ischaemia. Trials with poor quality methodology were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data from included trials were collated and analysed for the following outcomes: limb salvage, amputation, death, vessel patency, time to achieve thrombolysis, and reduction in the need for surgical intervention. Complication rates were compared for: major haemorrhage, cerebrovascular accident and distal embolization.

MAIN RESULTS

Intra-arterial delivery of thrombolytic agents appeared to be more effective than intravenous administration. Thrombolysis was more effective when the angiographic catheter was placed within the thrombus. Although 'high dose' and 'forced infusion' techniques achieved vessel patency in less time than 'low dose infusion', there were more bleeding complications, and no increase in patency rates or improvement in limb salvage at 30 days.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Implications for practice Thrombolysis should be reserved for patients with limb threatening ischaemia, due to the high risk of haemorrhage or death. Greater benefit is seen when the thrombolytic agent is delivered into the thrombus. Systemic intravenous thrombolysis is less effective than intra-arterial thrombolysis and is associated with an increase in bleeding complications. 'High dose' and 'forced infusion' techniques, or adjunctive agents such as platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors may speed up thrombolysis, but these are not accompanied by lower amputation rates or a decreased need for adjunctive endovascular or surgical procedures. 'Low dose continuous infusion', following initial lacing of the thrombus with a high dose of the thrombolytic agent, is the least labour intensive technique. Implications for research Only large multicentre trials with carefully controlled inclusion criteria will be sufficiently powerful to demonstrate genuine benefit for a particular thrombolytic regime.

Effectiveness of pharmacomechanical thrombolysis in infants and children

Between March 1995 and February 2000, 10 children with major thromboses were treated with local pharmacomechanical thrombolysis. Clinical improvement was found in 8 patients: follow-up angiography showed complete thrombus resolution in 5 patients and subtotal resolution in 4.

Percutaneous catheter thrombus aspiration for acute or subacute arterial occlusion of the legs: how much thrombolysis is needed?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of a combined percutaneous endovascular approach including thrombus aspiration, catheter thrombolysis, and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) to treat acute and subacute occlusions of native leg arteries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of this catheter therapy in 89 consecutive patients (93 legs) in a single centre.

RESULTS

Treatment was initially successful in 90% of legs. Mortality at 30 days was 8%, and at 12 months 19%. Amputation-free survival at 12 months was 78%. Aspiration alone was sufficient in 31% of cases, urokinase (mean dose 112 500+/-55 900 IU) was used in 22%, PTA was added in 69%. There was no major bleeding except for one false aneurysm treated by ultrasound-guided compression. Secondary interventions within 12 months were required in 30% of cases (14 endovascular, 16 open surgical procedures).

CONCLUSIONS

Catheter thrombus aspiration in combination with thrombolysis and/or PTA is highly effective. Only in a minority of patients are thrombolytics in modest doses necessary, and serious bleeding complications are rare. We recommend this procedure as first-line treatment for acute or subacute infrainguinal arterial occlusions.

Thrombolytic therapy with use of alteplase (rt-PA) in peripheral arterial occlusive disease: review of the clinical literature. The Advisory Panel

PURPOSE

The clinical literature describing the use of alteplase in the treatment of peripheral arterial occlusive (PAO) disease is reviewed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The literature database was acquired by a MEDLINE search using the Boolean keyword string: tissue plasminogen activator and/or rt-PA and peripheral not animal. A review was performed to identify the dose range of alteplase, technique of infusion, use of anticoagulation, clinical success rates, and risk of complications.

RESULTS

Forty-six clinical studies were identified. There are few prospective, randomized clinical trials and a lack of standardized protocols and endpoints. Use of catheter-directed infusions of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) may be beneficial versus surgery in the initial management of acute limb ischemia (< 14 days) and in reducing the magnitude of subsequent surgical or percutaneous revascularization. For patients with chronic limb ischemia (> 14 days), irreversible acute limb ischemia, or advanced diabetic arteriopathy, catheter-directed infusion of rt-PA or other plasminogen activators may be unsuitable. The risk of adverse bleeding appears related to the overall dose and duration of infusion. These risks appear similar to those of urokinase. The role of heparin in increasing adverse bleeding during rt-PA therapy is unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no generally accepted dose or technique for administering catheter-directed thrombolysis using alteplase; however, several studies have demonstrated its clinical safety and efficacy. Formal studies will be required to determine the optimal dose, technique of infusion, the role of anticoagulation, and complication rates when alteplase is used for PAO disease.

Peripheral thrombolysis for acute-onset claudication. Thrombolysis Study Group

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of patients who presented with sudden onset of incapacitating claudication of less than 2 weeks' duration and who were treated with peripheral arterial thrombolysis.

METHODS

The database of the Thrombolysis Study Group was searched retrospectively for patients who received thrombolysis for acute-onset claudication. Some 108 patients (65 men, median age 69 (range 29-94) years) were treated with intra-arterial tissue plasminogen activator at 14 hospitals. The median duration of symptoms was 72 h (range from 2 h to 2 weeks). There were 52 graft and 56 native vessel arterial occlusions.

RESULTS

The immediate outcome of thrombolysis for native vessel arterial occlusion was thrombus clearance in 50 patients (89 per cent) and failed lysis in six (11 per cent). Thirty-six patients (64 per cent) had a secondary radiological or surgical procedure carried out after lysis. After 30 days four patients (7 per cent) had a major amputation, eight (14 per cent) had died, 38 (68 per cent) were symptom free and seven (12 per cent) continued to have claudication. Three patients (5 per cent) suffered a major haemorrhage. The immediate outcome of thrombolysis for graft occlusion was thrombus clearance in 48 patients (92 per cent) and failed lysis in four (8 per cent); 27 patients (52 per cent) had a secondary procedure. After 30 days four patients (8 per cent) had a major amputation, seven (13 per cent) had died, 32 (62 per cent) were symptom free and nine (17 per cent) had persistent claudication. Three patients (6 per cent) suffered a major haemorrhage.

CONCLUSION

Patients who presented with acute onset of incapacitating claudication had an outcome similar to that after thrombolysis for critical ischaemia. It is recommended that patients who present in this way should be observed and treated with thrombolysis only if they progress to critical ischaemia. Presented to the Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, Edinburgh, UK, May 1998, and published in abstract form as Br J Surg 1998; 85(Suppl 1): 24