Abstract:Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of pharmacomechanical thrombolysis and thrombectomy (PCDT) plus catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) vs CDT alone for the treatment of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and summarize the clinical experience, safety outcomes, and short- and long-term efficacy.Methods: We performed a 4-year retrospective, case-control study. A total of 95 consecutive patients with acute symptomatic iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) with a symptom duration of <= 7 days involving the iliac and/or common femoral veins underwent endovascular interventions. The patients were divided into two groups according to their clinical indications: PCDT plus CDT vs CDT alone. Statistical analyses were used to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes between the two groups. Additionally, the patients were followed up for 3 to 36 months after treatment, and the proportions of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) and moderate to severe PTS were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier survival method.Results: A total of 95 consecutive patients were analyzed in this retrospective study, of whom, 51 underwent CDT alone and 44 underwent PCDT plus CDT. Between the two groups, in terms of immediate-term efficacy and safety, significant differences were found in the catheter retention time (60.64 +/- 12.04 hours vs 19.42 +/- 4.04 hours; P < .001), dosages of urokinase required (5.82 +/- 0.81 million units vs 1.80 +/- 0.64 million units; P < .001), the detumescence rate at 24 hours postoperatively (48.46% +/- 8.62% vs 76.79% +/- 7.98%; P = .026), the descent velocity of D-dimer per day (2266.28 +/- 1358.26 mu g/L/D vs 3842.34 +/- 2048.02 mu g/L/D; P = .018), total hospitalization stay (6.2 +/- 1.40 days vs 3.8 +/- 0.70 days; P = .024), number of postoperative angiograms (2.4 +/- 0.80 vs 1.2 +/- 0.30; P = .042), and grade III venous patency (>95% lysis: 54.5% vs 68.6%; P = .047). Furthermore, during the follow-up period, significant differences were found in the incidence of PTS (Villalta scale >= 5 or a venous ulcer: 47.0% vs 27.7%; P = .037), and the incidence proportion of moderate to severe PTS at 12 months (15.7% vs 4.5%; P = .024) and 24 months (35.3% vs 11.4%; P = .016).Conclusions: Compared with CDT alone, in the iliofemoral DVT subgroup with a symptom duration of <= 7 days, PCDT plus CDT could significantly relieve early leg symptoms, shorten the hospitalization stay, reduce bleeding complications, promote long-term venous patency, and decrease the occurrence of PTS and the incidence proportion of moderate to severe PTS. Thus, the short- and long-term outcomes both support the superiority of PCDT plus CDT vs CDT in this subgroup.

Catheter-directed thrombolysis through anterior tibia veins for deep venous thrombosis

Application evaluation of different approaches for catheter-directed thrombolysis in acute lower-extremity deep venous thrombosis

Catheter Directed Thrombolysis for Treatment of Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis of the Lower Extremity of the Effect and Safety Analysis in 116 Cases

Catheter-directed Thrombolysis Compared with Anticoagulation Treatment for Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis-Short and Mid-Term Result

AngioJet Mechanical Thrombectomy for Lower Deep Venous Thrombosis

Via the popliteal venous catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep venous thrombosis of acute lower extremity

TRANSCATHETER THROMBOLYSIS VIA THE SMALL SAPHENOUS VEIN FOR ACUTE LOWER LIMB DEEP VENOUS THROMBOSIS

Catheter-directed Thrombolysis with Endovascular Angioptasty for Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis

Ultrasound-guided versus non-guided catheter-directed thrombolysis in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis

Clinical experience of thrombectomy and catheter-directed thrombolysis in the treatment of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis

Comparison of clear effect and the complications, and short and mid-term effects between ultrasound-guided and non-guided catheter-directed thrombolysis in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis of lower extremity

The Application of Assistant Catheterization Technique in Interventional Treatment of Deep Venous Thrombosis of Left Lower Extremity

Application of Affected Side Femoral Vein Puncture in the Intervention Treatment of Left Lower-extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis

Outcome Comparisons of Anticoagulation, Systematic Thrombolysis and Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in the Treatment of Lower Extremity Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis

Application of inferior vena cava filter placement and catheter-guided thrombolysis in treatment of deep venous thrombosis in lower extremities

Intra-arterial Contimuous Thrombolytic Therapy for Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis

Analysis of Efficacy of Therapy in 165 Cases of Deep Vein Thrombosis of Lower Extremity

Comparative Outcomes of Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis versus AngioJet Pharmaco-mechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Treatment of Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis

[Analysis of Clinical Therapeutic Effect Using Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy in the Treatment of Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis].

Comparative Outcomes of Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus AngioJet Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Treatment of Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis.

Thrombectomy monitoring by DSA combined with thrombolytic therapy for deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities