Editor's Choice - Factors Associated with Long-Term Outcome in 191 Patients with Ilio-Femoral DVT Treated With Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with long-term treatment success after catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) involving the ilio-femoral vein. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a non-randomised observational cohort study. From 1999 to 2013, 191 consecutive patients (203 limbs) attending a tertiary vascular centre at Gentofte University Hospital, Denmark underwent CDT. All patients had ultrasonically verified acute ilio-femoral DVT with open distal popliteal vein and calf veins. Patients were seen in the outpatient clinic 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months, and annually thereafter following the DVT. Successful outcome was defined as patent deep veins without reflux on Duplex ultrasound scanning (DUS). Data were collected prospectively as per protocol and analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Median age was 27 years (range 14-74 years) and overall median lysis time was 56 h (range 22-146 h). A stent was placed in 106 limbs (52%). Six patients had major bleeding. The median follow-up was 5 years (range 1 month-14.3 years). The cumulative rate of patients with deep patent veins without reflux at 7 years was 79%. Multivariate Cox regression analyses showed that symptom duration >2 weeks (hazard ratio (HR) 2.78, 95% CI 1.14-6.73) and chronic post-thrombotic lesions (HR 19.3, 95% CI 7.29-51.2) were significantly associated with poorer outcome, while the pulse-spray technique (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.48) was associated with better outcome. Age, gender, side, IVC atresia, stenting, and lysis duration did not affect outcome. CONCLUSION: In this observational study of CDT for ilio-femoral DVT it was demonstrated that symptom duration less than 2 weeks, absence of chronic post-thrombotic lesions and use of the pulse-spray technique for CDT resulted in better primary patency including normal valve function in the long term.

Thrombus age is ideally measured by history or MRV prior to thrombus removal.

Many factors are known to be important in order to achieve optimal results after thrombus removal for iliofemoral DVT. Not much is published in the literature about timing the treatment, though many guidelines recommend treatment within 14 days. This time span lies within the phrase of acute DVT according to the definition given in many reporting standards. This article will highlight the value of information acquired from patients directly regarding onset of symptoms versus information acquired from imaging with the purpose of a more precise selection of patients for catheter-directed thrombolysis for iliofemoral DVT. What is the value of clinical information acquired from patients and does the information from imaging have additional value?

Which criteria demand additive stenting during catheter-directed thrombolysis?

Many factors are necessary for obtaining satisfactory results after catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Selections of patients, composition of the thrombolytic fluid, anticoagulation per- and post-procedural, recognition and treatment of persistent obstructive lesions of the iliac veins are the most important contributors. Stenting has been known for 15 to 20 years. The first publication on CDT in 1991 was combined with ballooning the iliac vein, an additive procedure which has been abandoned as an isolated procedure. This chapter will discuss selection, indication, such as an iliac compression syndrome, and outcome of iliac stenting in combination with CDT. The reported frequency of stenting used after CDT is very inconsistent, therefore this will be discussed in details. It is concluded that selection for stenting is of the greatest importance, when CDT is used for iliofemoral DVT, but strict criteria for stenting are not available in the existing literature. The potential value of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is also discussed.

Deep venous thrombosis of the upper extremity. A review.

UNLABELLED: Upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (UEDVT) occurs either spontaneously, as a consequence of strenuous upper limb activity (also known as the Paget-Schroetter syndrome) or secondary to an underlying cause. Primary and secondary UEDVT differs in long-term sequelae and mortality. This review will focus on the clinical presentation, risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment strategies of UEDVT. In the period from January to October 2012 an electronic literature search was performed in the PubMed/MEDLINE database, and 27 publications were included. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: swelling, pain and functional impairment are typical symptoms of UEDVT, although completely asymptomatic cases have been described. However life-threatening, massive pulmonary embolism (PE) can also be a sign of UEDVT. RISK FACTORS: for the primary condition anatomical abnormalities (Thoracic Outlet Syndrome, TOS) may dispose to the condition. Malignancy and therapeutic interventions are major risk factors for the secondary deep vein thrombosis in combination with the patient's characteristics, comorbidities and prior history of deep vein thrombosis. COMPLICATIONS: recurrent deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism and Post Thrombotic Syndrome (PTS) are the major complications after UEDVT. PTS is a chronic condition leading to significant functional disability and impaired quality of life. DIAGNOSIS: compression ultrasonography is noninvasive and the most frequently used objective test with a high accuracy in experienced hands. Treatment modalities and strategies: the treatment modalities include anticoagulation therapy, catheter-directed thrombolysis, surgical decompression, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting and they may be combined. However, the optimal treatment and timing of treatment remains controversial. Early diagnosis and treatment is essential to prevent PTS in primary UEDVT; however, there is no consensus on which treatment is the best. Anticoagulation is still considered the treatment of choice for at least 3-6 months, until Randomized Controlled Trials may have demonstrated otherwise.

Carotid endarterectomy after intravenous thrombolysis for acute cerebral ischaemic attack: is it safe?

OBJECTIVES: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) has proven effective in the treatment of acute cerebral ischaemic attack in selected cases. In the presence of a carotid artery stenosis, such patients may be candidates for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Few studies have been made on the safety of CEA performed after IVT. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. Data including 30 days' follow-up were obtained from medical records and from a vascular registry. MATERIALS: A consecutive series of 306 patients were operated on for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis during a 5-year period. Among these, 22 (7%) patients had been treated with IVT for an acute cerebral ischaemic attack prior to CEA and 284 (93%) patients had CEA only. METHODS: IVT as well as CEA was performed following established guidelines. CEA was performed in median 11 days (25 and 75% percentiles: 7-13 days) after the neurological index event in patients having undergone IVT and 12 days (25 and 75% percentiles: 8-21 days) in patients undergoing CEA only. RESULTS: The 30 days' stroke and death rate was 0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0-15%) in patients who had IVT before CEA and 2.4% (95% CI: 0.9-4.7%) in patients who underwent CEA only. CONCLUSION: Our experience indicates that CEA performed after IVT for acute cerebral ischaemic attack is safe, confirming existing but sparse publications. However, our series is small and our study possesses a number of limitations. Thus, our results cannot necessarily be transferred to other units, who instead should perform similar studies, preferably together.

Pregnancy after catheter-directed thrombolysis for acute iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in pregnancy and puerperium in women with previous acute iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis (DVT) treated with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients treated for acute iliofemoral DVT using CDT between June 1999 and June 2009 were followed yearly by colour duplex ultrasound scanning. A subgroup of these patients who became pregnant during the follow-up period, three months to 10 years after CDT, was included in the present study. During pregnancy, thromboprophylaxis using LMWH was prescribed according to individual risk assessment, and the women were regularly assessed for adverse events. Women on warfarin had this treatment discontinued before the sixth week of pregnancy in order to prevent potential teratogenic adverse effects. Administration of LMWH was started at international normalized ratio ≤ 2.0, and continued during pregnancy, delivery and puerperium. Postnatal, the anticoagulation treatment was converted back to warfarin and LMWH discontinued after a bridging period. Women, who, prior to pregnancy, had discontinued anticoagulation treatment after CDT, were prescribed anticoagulation treatment using LMWH as early in pregnancy as practical. LMWH was continued during pregnancy, delivery and for six weeks postpartum. All women were prescribed graduated compression stockings. RESULTS: A total of 33 women completed 45 pregnancies, 44 singletons and 1 gemelli. In 24 (53%) of the cases, the mother had been treated with adjunctive stenting immediately following the CDT. In nine (21%) of the pregnancies, the mother had been on long-time anticoagulation treatment using warfarin prior to conception due to permanent severe risk factors. Thrombophilia was demonstrated in 31 (69%) of the pregnancies, and in 29 (64%) of the patients, the previous DVT was oestrogen-related. Thromboprophylaxis using tinzaparin was given in 41 (91%) and using dalteparin in four (9%) of the pregnancies. Doses of LMWH during pregnancy were adjusted according to risk assessment. One pregnancy was terminated by induced delivery at week 22 due to fetal malformations, and two of the pregnancies (4%) were complicated by intrauterine fetal death, one in week 39 due to severe fetal infection and one in week 23 due to intrauterine fetal growth restriction caused by severe antiphospholipid syndrome. All but one of the pregnancies was carried out without recurrence of DVT or maternal pulmonary embolism and the mother remained having patent deep veins postnatal. The mother with the antiphospholipid syndrome had a recurrent DVT complicated by iliac stent occlusion. This mother was prior to pregnancy on long-time treatment using warfarin. During pregnancy, she was erroneously treated with LMWH in standard prophylaxis doses instead of therapeutic doses and without adding aspirin. CONCLUSIONS: After CDT for acute iliofemoral DVT including adjunctive stenting, pregnancy can be carried out almost uneventful even in women at high risk of thromboembolism. Thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy, using LMWH in a dosage adjusted to individual risk assessment, is essential.