Treatment with direct oral anticoagulants in patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

Innominate Vein Thrombosis: A Case Report and Literature Review

The brachiocephalic vein (BCV), also known as the innominate vein, is a central vein in the upper chest formed by merging the internal jugular and subclavian veins. It plays a crucial role in venous return from the head, neck, and upper extremities and is significant in procedures such as pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement, chemotherapy ports, and central venous catheter insertions. The presence of foreign bodies and local malignancy are major risk factors for thrombosis in the BCV. As part of the deep venous system, BCV thrombosis (BCVT) is a rare condition but can lead to serious complications like superior vena cava syndrome and, rarely, pulmonary embolism. This case report presents an 82-year-old woman with a history of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, HIV, pulmonary embolism, systemic lupus erythematosus, and breast cancer who required an ICD placement due to persistent systolic dysfunction. During the procedure, chronic BCVT leading to the stenosis was incidentally discovered, necessitating urgent vascular intervention to establish venous patency. The patient's complex medical history, including previous chemotherapy through a central venous catheter, contributed to the risk factors for BCVT. The multidisciplinary approach led to successful ICD placement and the reinstatement of anticoagulation therapy. This case underscores the rarity and severity of BCVT and highlights the importance of pre-procedural imaging, such as CT venography, in patients with multiple risk factors. Additionally, the report suggests considering leadless ICD technology for patients with limited venous access to avoid complications. The findings emphasize the critical need for thorough evaluation and planning in complex cases to ensure successful outcomes.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome, recurrent thromboembolism, and bleeding after upper extremity vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Data on complications after upper extremity vein thrombosis (UEVT) are limited and heterogeneous.

METHODS

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the pooled proportions of venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, bleeding, and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients with UEVT. A systematic literature review was conducted of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from January 2000 to April 2023 in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. All studies included patients with UEVT and were published in English. Meta-analyses of VTE recurrence, bleeding, and of PTS after UEVT were performed to compute pooled estimates and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses of cancer-associated UEVT and catheter-associated venous thrombosis were conducted. Patients with Paget-Schroetter syndrome or effort thrombosis were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 55 studies with 15,694 patients were included. The pooled proportions for VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and PTS were 4.8% (95% CI, 3.8%-6.2%), 3.0% (95% CI, 2.2%-4.0%), and 23.8% (95% CI, 17.0%-32.3%), respectively. The pooled proportion of VTE recurrence was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.6%) for patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), 1.7% (95% CI, 0.8%-3.7%) for patients treated with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.5%-11.8%) for vitamin K antagonists (VKAs; P = .36). The pooled proportion was 6.3% (95% CI, 4.3%-9.1%) for cancer patients compared with 3.1% (95% CI, 2.1%-4.6%) for patients without cancer (P = .01). The pooled proportion of major bleeding for patients treated with DOACs, LMWH, and VKAs, was 2.1% (95% CI, 0.9%-5.1%), 3.2% (95% CI, 1.4%-7.2%), and 3.4% (95% CI, 1.4%-8.4%), respectively (P = .72). The pooled proportion of PTS for patients treated with DOACs, LMWH, and VKAs was 11.8% (95% CI, 6.5%-20.6%), 27.9% (95% CI, 20.9%-36.2%), and 24.5% (95% CI, 17.6%-33.1%), respectively (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study suggest that UEVT is associated with significant rates of PTS and VTE recurrence. Treatment with DOACs might be associated with lower PTS rates than treatment with other anticoagulants.

Treatment of pacemaker-induced superior vena cava syndrome by direct oral anticoagulant

BACKGROUND

The use of cardiac implantable electronic devices has grown substantially over the past two decades, lead-related vascular issues are commonly encountered in clinical practice. Superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome due to pacemaker leads is an uncommon complication. Anticoagulation remains the mainstay of therapy to restore some degree of patency and relieve swelling. However, there are limited clinical trials on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).

CASE PRESENTATION

We report a case of an 80-year-old man who developed SVC syndrome after transvenous pacemaker implantation with symptoms of obstruction that were significantly relieved after four months of DOACs. His symptoms had completely resolved nine months later.

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs are effective in the treatment of SVC syndrome after pacemaker implantation, representing an important new approach. It is a very good choice for patients who do not want to undergo interventional therapy.

A Single Center Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing Different Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Catheter-Related Thrombosis of the Upper Extremities in Women With Gynecologic and Breast Cancer

Background

Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) of the upper extremities is a frequent complication among cancer patients that carry a central venous catheter (CVC) and may lead to pulmonary embolism (PE) and loss of CVC function. Despite its clinical impact, no anticoagulant treatment scheme has been rigorously evaluated in these patients. In addition, there is no proven evidence that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are efficacious and safe in this setting because cancer patients with CRT of the upper extremities were not included in the clinical trials that led to the approval of DOACs for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE).

Methods

We performed a single center retrospective cohort study on women with gynecologic or breast cancer treated with either low-molecular-weight heparin, fondaparinux, or DOACs for CRT of the upper extremities. Only patients who received anticoagulation at the proper therapeutic dose and for at least 3 months were included in the analysis. Effectiveness was evaluated in terms of preservation of line function, residual thrombosis, and recurrence of VTE (including PE). Safety was evaluated in terms of death, major bleeding (MB), and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB).

Results

We identified 74 women who fulfilled the criteria to be included in the analysis. Of these, 31 (41.9%) had been treated with fondaparinux, 21 (28.4%) with enoxaparin, and 22 (29.7%) with the DOAC edoxaban. We found no differences between patients treated with the three different therapeutic approaches, in terms of preservation of line function, incidence of residual thrombosis, and VTE recurrence (including PE). Safety was similar as well, with no MBs recorded in any treatment group.

Conclusion

These results, although retrospective and based on a relatively small sample size, indicate that, in women with gynecologic or breast cancer, CRT of the upper extremities may be treated with similar effectiveness and safety with fondaparinux, enoxaparin, and edoxaban. Further studies are needed to substantiate these findings.

Anticoagulant treatment for upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Data on anticoagulant treatment for upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) are largely derived from studies on usual site venous thromboembolism (VTE).

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy for UEDVT.

PATIENTS/METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted for studies including patients with UEDVT. Primary outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included clinically-relevant non-major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Summary estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by random-effect meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1473 patients from 11 prospective and nine retrospective studies were included. Sixty percent of patients had an indwelling catheter and 56.1% had cancer. Anticoagulant treatment consisted of direct oral anticoagulants, low molecular weight heparin followed by vitamin K antagonists, and low molecular weight heparin alone in 45.1%, 35.0%, and 19.9% of patients, respectively. During a median follow-up of 13 months, recurrent VTE occurred in 3% of patients (95% CI: 2-4; 21/1334 patients), major bleeding in 3% (95% CI: 2%-5%; 29/1235 patients), clinically-relevant non-major bleeding in 4% (95% CI: 3-6; 40/1075 patients), and all-cause mortality in 9% (95% CI: 5-15; 108/1084 patients). Rates of these outcomes were not significantly different between patients with or without cancer, patients with or without an indwelling catheter, and among those receiving different anticoagulant treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with UEDVT, anticoagulant treatment is associated with a low risk of recurrent VTE and a nonnegligible risk of major bleeding.

Superior vena cava syndrome after pacemaker implantation treated with direct oral anticoagulation

Background

Superior Vena Cava (SVC) syndrome, is a quite rare but serious complication after pacemaker lead implantation; most patients are asymptomatic due to the development of adequate venous collateral circulation.

Case presentation

We report a case of a 75-year-old woman who developed SVC syndrome after transvenous pacemaker implantation with complete resolution of the thrombosis after 3 months of oral anticoagulation.

Conclusions

Generally other causes as malignancy are considered to be the most common etiology of SVC syndrome, but benign iatrogenic causes, mainly intravascular devices (central vein catheters, cardiac defibrillators and pacemaker wires), are becoming increasingly common. Procedures performed on venous vasculature, causing a possible intimal injury or vein stenosis, provoked by transvenous leads, seem to be the most reasonable explanation for the observed complication.

Upper extremities deep vein thrombosis treated with oral direct anticoagulants: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available on the role of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of upper extremities deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of DOACs in the treatment of UEDVT.

METHODS

Patients with an objectively confirmed acute UEDVT treated with DOACs were merged from prospective cohorts to a collaborative database. Primary study outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding occurring during DOAC treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, 188 patients were included in the study: mean age 52.4 ± 20.4 years, males 43.6%, patients with active cancer 29.2%. Twenty-nine percent of patients had 2 or more risk factors for VTE, 33.0% had catheter-related or pacemaker-related UEDVT. In 13.8% of patients, DOACs were started one month after UEDVT diagnosis or later. Active cancer was an independent predictor for delayed initiation of DOACs (OR 8.1, 95% CI 3.0-22.2). Mean duration of treatment with DOACs was 5.1 ± 2.8 months. During treatment with DOACs, recurrent VTE occurred in 0.9 per 100 patient-year, major bleeding in 1.7 and all-cause deaths in 6.0 per 100 patient-year. No fatal bleeding or fatal VTE recurrence were observed. During 232.1 patient-years of follow-up after DOAC withdrawal, recurrent VTE occurred in 3.0 per 100 patient-year. The 2019 ESC categories for risk of VTE recurrences were able to discriminate patient groups at different risk of events in the on and off-treatment periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support the feasibility as well as the effectiveness and safety of DOACs for the treatment of acute UEDVT.

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis treated with direct oral anticoagulants: a multi-center real world experience

Upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) accounts for about 5-10% of all cases of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). It is often associated with cancer and/or presence of a central venous catheter (CVC), but it may also occur in the absence of these favoring conditions. The safety and efficacy of using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in subjects with UEDVT has not been systematically evaluated and the only data available in the literature derive from anecdotal evidence, analysis of registries, and small single-centre studies. In addition, a specific analysis of UEDVT not associated with cancer and/or CVC has never been made. In this study, we specifically focused on patients with no cancer and without a CVC who were diagnosed with a first episode of UEDVT and were treated with a DOAC. We studied 61 patients, treated in six Italian centres between January 2014 and December 2018. Treatment lasted at least 3 months in all patients. In terms of efficacy, no recurrence of thrombosis or pulmonary embolism were recorded, while Doppler ultrasonography, performed after at least three months of treatment, documented in all cases either partial or complete recanalization of obstructed veins. In terms of safety, no cases of major bleedings were recorded. This is the only series available in the literature of patients treated with DOACs for UEDVT not associated with cancer and/or CVC. This small multicenter real world experience supports the concept that DOACs might be safe and effective for treating UEDTV. Further studies are required to better understand the role of DOACs in these patients.

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.

Direct oral anticoagulants for unusual-site venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are currently the preferred oral anticoagulant treatment for most of the patients with deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremities and/or pulmonary embolism. DOACs have several advantages over vitamin K antagonists, such as availability of fixed dosages, fewer drug interactions, faster onset of action, shorter half-life, and lower risk of major and intracranial bleeding. Although the evidence on the use of DOACs in patients with unusual-site venous thromboembolism (VTE) is limited to a few, small randomized controlled trials, these drugs are increasingly used in clinical practice, and several observational cohort studies have been published recently. This narrative review will describe the latest evidence for the use of the DOACs in patients with thrombosis in atypical locations (splanchnic, cerebral, upper extremity, ovarian, and renal vein thrombosis) and will provide some practical advice for their use in patients with unusual-site VTE.

Management of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in Occitanie: practice assessment

BACKGROUND

The incidence of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) is increasing. Its management is sometimes complex and difficult due to its complications and the lack of strong recommendations. The aim was to describe the practice of vascular physicians in Occitanie region in the management of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We used a descriptive observational study in the form of a declarative survey by means of a questionnaire from April to May 2019 among vascular physicians.

RESULTS

Of the 142 physicians contacted, 84 responded, with a reply rate of 59.1%. The majority of physicians introduced low-molecular-weight heparin treatment (60.71%) and 29.76% direct oral anticoagulation after a diagnosis of UEDVT. Three months of anticoagulation was chosen by 69% of physicians against 27.4% for a duration of 6 months. Diagnostic work-up included biological risk factors, chest and/or cervical radiography and ultrasonography with dynamic maneuvers. Three quarters of doctors recommended venous compression. A control ultrasonography was performed for 67.86% of patients at one month and at the end of treatment. After the acute phase, 63% of physicians introduced direct oral anticoagulation and 11% recommended venous revascularization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The mobilization of vascular physicians reflects their interest for this pathology. The management of UEDVT requires specific studies to address therapeutic modalities, the duration of anticoagulation or the place of venous compression in the acute phase.

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.

Treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis with apixaban and rivaroxaban

Randomized controlled trials leading to the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban for venous thromboembolism (VTE) did not include patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UE-DVT). We sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban for the treatment of acute UE-DVT. Consecutive patients with VTE enrolled into the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry, between March 1, 2013 and December 31, 2019, were followed prospectively. Clinical, demographic and imaging data were collected at the time of study recruitment. Patients with a diagnosis of acute UE-DVT who received rivaroxaban, apixaban, LMWH or warfarin were included. Recurrent VTE, major bleeding, clinical-relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), and death were assessed at 3-month intervals. During the study period, 210 patients with acute UE-DVT were included; 63 were treated with apixaban, 39 with rivaroxaban, and 108 with LWMH and/or warfarin. Overall 51% had catheter-associated UE-DVT, 60% had a diagnosis of malignancy, and 14% had concurrent pulmonary embolism. Malignancy was more common in patients treated with LMWH/warfarin (67% vs 52%, P = .03). At 3 months of follow up, one (0.9%) recurrent VTE occurred in a patient treated with LMWH/warfarin and one (1.0%) patient treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .97). Major bleeding occurred in three patients treated with LMWH/warfarin, and in none of those treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .09). Clinical-relevant non-major bleeding occurred in one patient (0.9%) treated with LWMH/warfarin and two patients (2.0%) treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .53). Treatment of UE-DVT with apixaban or rivaroxaban appears to be as safe and effective as LMWH/warfarin.

Treatment of unusual thrombotic manifestations

Venous thrombosis rarely occurs at unusual sites such as cerebral, splanchnic, upper-extremity, renal, ovarian, or retinal veins. Clinical features, symptoms, and risk factors of rare thrombotic manifestations are heterogeneous and in large part differ from those typical of the commonest manifestations of venous thrombosis at the lower extremities. The therapeutic approach also varies widely according to the affected site, whether cerebral, abdominal, or extraabdominal. To date, anticoagulant therapy for thrombosis at unusual sites is generally accepted, but the optimal therapeutic approach remains challenging. This review is focused on the treatment of unusual thrombotic manifestations as reported in the most recent guidelines and according to the updated scientific literature.