Acenocoumarol and pentoxifylline in intermittent claudication. A controlled clinical study. The APIC Study Group.

The efficacy and safety of pentoxifylline (400 mg tid orally) and acenocoumarol, administered singly or in combination, in the treatment of intermittent claudication associated with chronic occlusive arterial disease were evaluated in a multi-center, randomized, factorial, blind clinical trial involving 146 patients. The response to treatment was assessed by measuring pain-free walking time on the treadmill and by Doppler ankle/arm systolic pressure ratio at rest and after treadmill. Both pentoxifylline and acenocoumarol were significantly more effective than placebo in increasing the proportion of patients who improved their performance on the treadmill after one year of treatment. Benefit from active treatment was also apparent from the results of Doppler examinations performed after physical exercise. No significant differences were observed in comparing the effect of one active drug versus the other or versus the combined treatment. Five major hemorrhagic complications were registered in anticoagulated patients, two fatal cerebral hemorrhages and one gastrointestinal bleeding occurring in the group treated with both active drugs. The investigators conclude that (1) pentoxifylline is effective and safe in the treatment of patients with intermittent claudication (2) the benefits of oral anticoagulant therapy are outweighed by the risk of serious bleeding, and (3) the risk of bleeding is probably increased by the combined treatment with pentoxifylline.

[Instrumental diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis. Prospective study with non-invasive methods]. / Diagnostica strumentale di trombosi venosa profonda. Studio prospettico con metodiche non invasive.

The clinical diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis is unreliable and venography remains the best single method of investigation. In the last ten years several non-invasive procedures have been introduced in the vascular laboratories, sometime without adequate assessment of their reliability. We tested sensitivity and specificity of three different non-invasive procedures, namely phleboscintigraphy with 99Technetium, Doppler ultrasound technique and strain-gauge plethysmography in patients with clinically suspected deep vein thrombosis of lower limbs or pulmonary embolism. A total of 288 patients entered the study. Venography was used as the reference standard and was assessed independently, without knowledge of the results of non-invasive methods. In the first 36 patients phleboscintigraphy and Doppler ultrasound were evaluated: sensitivity and specificity of phleboscintigraphy resulted only a little more than 50%; the method was therefore considered unreliable and subsequently abandoned. Doppler ultrasound could be evaluated upon a total of 81 patients, showing an unsatisfactory sensitivity (63%), but a quite reliable specificity (86%). Best results were obtained with strain-gauge plethysmography, using maximal venous outflow and venous capacitance as diagnostic parameters. 209 patients entered this study, and a sensitivity of about 90% with a specificity of about 95% was observed. If we consider only acute proximal deep vein thrombosis, sensitivity approaches 97%, while it is only 60% in distal deep vein thrombosis.