Deep venous thrombosis: The valve cusp hypoxia thesis and its incompatibility with modern orthodoxy.

The valve cusp hypoxia thesis (VCHT) of the aetiology of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) was adumbrated in this journal in 1977 and fully articulated in 2008, the original hypothesis having been strongly corroborated by experiments published in 1981 and 1984. It presents a unitary account of the pathogenesis of venous thrombosis and embolism that is rooted in the pathophysiological tradition of Hunter, Virchow, Lister, Welch and Aschoff, a tradition traceable back to Harvey. In this paper we summarise the thesis in its mature form, consider its compatibility with recent advances in the DVT field, and ask why it has not yet been assimilated into the mainstream literature, which during the past half century has been dominated by a haematology-orientated 'consensus model'. We identify and discuss seven ways in which the VCHT is incompatible with these mainstream beliefs about the aetiology of venous thrombosis, drawing attention to: (1) the spurious nature of 'Virchow's triad'; (2) the crucial differences between 'venous thrombus' and 'clot'; the facts that (3) venous thrombi form in the valve pockets (VVPs), (4) DVT is not a primarily haematological condition, (5) the so-called 'thrombophilias' are not thrombogenic per se; (6) the conflict between the single unitary aetiology of DVT and the tacit assumption that the condition is 'multicausal'; (7) the inability of anticoagulants to prevent the initiation of venous thrombogenesis, though they do prevent the growth of thrombi to clinically significant size. In discussing point (7), we show that the VCHT indicates new approaches to mechanical prophylaxis against DVT. These approaches are then formulated as experimentally testable hypotheses, and we suggest methods for testing them preclinically using animal trials.

Experimental Validation of Methods for Prophylaxis against Deep Venous Thrombosis: A Review and Proposal.

The experimental procedure by which the valve cusp hypoxia (VCH) hypothesis of the etiology of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) was confirmed lends itself to testing of methods of prophylaxis. Similar animal experiments could end the present exclusive reliance on statistical analysis of data from large patient cohorts to evaluate prophylactic regimes. The reduction of need for such (usually retrospective) analyses could enable rationally-based clinical trials of prophylactic methods to be conducted more rapidly, and the success of such trials would lead to decreased incidences of DVT-related mortality and morbidity. This paper reviews the VCH hypothesis ("VCH thesis", following its corroboration) and its implications for understanding DVT and its sequelae, and outlines the experimental protocol for testing prophylactic methods. The advantages and limitations of the protocol are briefly discussed.

Diet as prophylaxis and treatment for venous thromboembolism?

BACKGROUND: Both prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE: deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary emboli (PE)) with anticoagulants are associated with significant risks of major and fatal hemorrhage. Anticoagulation treatment of VTE has been the standard of care in the USA since before 1962 when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration began requiring randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) showing efficacy, so efficacy trials were never required for FDA approval. In clinical trials of 'high VTE risk' surgical patients before the 1980s, anticoagulant prophylaxis was clearly beneficial (fatal pulmonary emboli (FPE) without anticoagulants = 0.99%, FPE with anticoagulants = 0.31%). However, observational studies and RCTs of 'high VTE risk' surgical patients from the 1980s until 2010 show that FPE deaths without anticoagulants are about one-fourth the rate that occurs during prophylaxis with anticoagulants (FPE without anticoagulants = 0.023%, FPE while receiving anticoagulant prophylaxis = 0.10%). Additionally, an FPE rate of about 0.012% (35/28,400) in patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulants can be attributed to 'rebound hypercoagulation' in the two months after stopping anticoagulants. Alternatives to anticoagulant prophylaxis should be explored. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The literature concerning dietary influences on VTE incidence was reviewed. Hypotheses concerning the etiology of VTE were critiqued in relationship to the rationale for dietary versus anticoagulant approaches to prophylaxis and treatment.Epidemiological evidence suggests that a diet with ample fruits and vegetables and little meat may substantially reduce the risk of VTE; vegetarian, vegan, or Mediterranean diets favorably affect serum markers of hemostasis and inflammation. The valve cusp hypoxia hypothesis of DVT/VTE etiology is consistent with the development of VTE being affected directly or indirectly by diet. However, it is less consistent with the rationale of using anticoagulants as VTE prophylaxis. For both prophylaxis and treatment of VTE, we propose RCTs comparing standard anticoagulation with low VTE risk diets, and we discuss the statistical considerations for an example of such a trial. CONCLUSIONS: Because of (a) the risks of biochemical anticoagulation as anti-VTE prophylaxis or treatment, (b) the lack of placebo-controlled efficacy data supporting anticoagulant treatment of VTE, (c) dramatically reduced hospital-acquired FPE incidence in surgical patients without anticoagulant prophylaxis from 1980 - 2010 relative to the 1960s and 1970s, and (d) evidence that VTE incidence and outcomes may be influenced by diet, randomized controlled non-inferiority clinical trials are proposed to compare standard anticoagulant treatment with potentially low VTE risk diets. We call upon the U. S. National Institutes of Health and the U.K. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence to design and fund those trials.

To what extent might deep venous thrombosis and chronic venous insufficiency share a common etiology?

According to the valve cusp hypoxia hypothesis (VCHH), deep venous thrombosis is caused by sustained non-pulsatile (streamline) venous blood flow. This leads to hypoxemia in the valve pockets; hypoxic injury to the inner (parietalis) endothelium of the cusp leaflets activates the elk-1/egr-1 pathway, leading to leukocyte and platelet swarming at the site of injury and, potentially, blood coagulation. Here, we propose an extension of the VCHH to account for chronic venous insufficiency. First, should the foregoing events not proceed to frank thrombogenesis, the valves may nevertheless be chronically injured and become incompetent. Serial incompetence in lower limb valves may then generate ''passive'' venous hypertension. Second, should ostial valve thrombosis obstruct venous return from muscles via tributaries draining into the femoral vein, as Virchow illustrated, ''active'' venous hypertension may supervene: muscle contraction would force the blood in the vessels behind the blocked ostial valves to re-route. Passive or active venous hypertension opposes return flow, leading to luminal hypoxemia and vein wall distension, which in turn may impair vasa venarum perfusion; the resulting mural endothelial hypoxia would lead to leukocyte invasion of the wall and remodelling of the media. We propose that varicose veins result if gross active hypertension stretches the valve ''rings'', rendering attached valves incompetent caudad to obstructed sites, replacing normal centripetal flow in perforating veins with centrifugal flow and over-distending those vessels. We also discuss how hypoxemia-related venous/capillary wall lesions may lead to accumulation of leukocytes, progressive blockage of capillary blood flow, lipodermosclerosis and skin ulceration.

Directions in biomedical research: a plea for ideological pluralism.

Feinstein [A.R. Feinstein, Am. J. Med. 107 (1999) 461] complained that 'basic medical science' has overwhelmed 'pathophysiological medical science' during the past half century, and 'destroyed the bridge between bedside and bench'. We agree that a 'drastic reorientation' will be necessary to correct the overemphasis and imbalance. Re-examining the roots of his problem, we believe that a plea to restore a balance between the 'status' (esteem) of 'large research' and 'small research' in medical science brings back into question the decision of academic physiologists to invoke the framework of Physics in/of 1847 [P.F. Cranefield, J. Hist. Med. Allied Sci. 12 (1957) 407] (together with an absolutist 'Prime Mover'/Metaphysic which Einstein would delete from Physics in 1905). The current 'imbalance' arose when that Cartesian 'Prime Mover' was NOT deleted from the Biological frame. Feinstein felt that the 'privileged status' (esteem) in which fund-giving bodies hold 'Small' researches compared to 'Large' should be cancelled. Once Biology replaces its Cartesian absolutism with a relativist framework, redress will follow naturally when living-material has regained the status of cause as well as effect. Descartes' 'Great Watchmaker' is a Dead God in Biology: a non-metaphysical Biological Perspective would restore balance between 'large' and 'small' investigations. ('Pluralism' implies that no scientific perspective would be second-rate in a relativist framework.)