Cargando…

Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

Standard anticoagulant treatment alone for acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is ineffective in eliminating thrombus from the deep venous system, with many patients developing postthrombotic syndrome (PTS). Because catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) can dissolve the clot, reducing th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lu, Yongming, Chen, Linyi, Chen, Jinhui, Tang, Tao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6714738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29132220
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029617739703
_version_ 1783447111908458496
author Lu, Yongming
Chen, Linyi
Chen, Jinhui
Tang, Tao
author_facet Lu, Yongming
Chen, Linyi
Chen, Jinhui
Tang, Tao
author_sort Lu, Yongming
collection PubMed
description Standard anticoagulant treatment alone for acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is ineffective in eliminating thrombus from the deep venous system, with many patients developing postthrombotic syndrome (PTS). Because catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) can dissolve the clot, reducing the development of PTS in iliofemoral or femoropopliteal DVT. This meta-analysis compares CDT plus anticoagulation versus standard anticoagulation for acute iliofemoral or femoropopliteal DVT. Ten trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with anticoagulant alone, CDT was shown to significantly increase the percentage patency of the iliofemoral vein (P < .00001; I (2) = 44%) and reduce the risk of PTS (P = .0002; I (2) = 79%). In subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials, CDT was not shown to prevent PTS (P = .2; I (2) = 59%). A reduced PTS risk was shown, however, in nonrandomized trials (P < .00001; I (2) = 47%). Meta-analysis showed that CDT can reduce severe PTS risk (P = .002; I (2) = 0%). However, CDT was not indicated to prevent mild PTS (P = .91; I (2) = 79%). A significant increase in bleeding events (P < .00001; I (2) = 33%) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (P < .00001; I (2) = 14%) were also demonstrated. However, for the CDT group, the duration of stay in the hospital was significantly prolonged compared to the anticoagulant group (P < .00001; I (2) = 0%). There was no significant difference in death (P = .09; I (2) = 0%) or recurrent venous thromboembolism events (P = .52; I (2) = 58%). This meta-analysis showed that CDT may improve patency of the iliofemoral vein or severe PTS compared with anticoagulation therapy alone, but measuring PTS risk remains controversial. However, CDT could increase the risk of bleeding events, PE events, and duration of hospital stay.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6714738
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67147382019-09-04 Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials Lu, Yongming Chen, Linyi Chen, Jinhui Tang, Tao Clin Appl Thromb Hemost Original Articles Standard anticoagulant treatment alone for acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is ineffective in eliminating thrombus from the deep venous system, with many patients developing postthrombotic syndrome (PTS). Because catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) can dissolve the clot, reducing the development of PTS in iliofemoral or femoropopliteal DVT. This meta-analysis compares CDT plus anticoagulation versus standard anticoagulation for acute iliofemoral or femoropopliteal DVT. Ten trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with anticoagulant alone, CDT was shown to significantly increase the percentage patency of the iliofemoral vein (P < .00001; I (2) = 44%) and reduce the risk of PTS (P = .0002; I (2) = 79%). In subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials, CDT was not shown to prevent PTS (P = .2; I (2) = 59%). A reduced PTS risk was shown, however, in nonrandomized trials (P < .00001; I (2) = 47%). Meta-analysis showed that CDT can reduce severe PTS risk (P = .002; I (2) = 0%). However, CDT was not indicated to prevent mild PTS (P = .91; I (2) = 79%). A significant increase in bleeding events (P < .00001; I (2) = 33%) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (P < .00001; I (2) = 14%) were also demonstrated. However, for the CDT group, the duration of stay in the hospital was significantly prolonged compared to the anticoagulant group (P < .00001; I (2) = 0%). There was no significant difference in death (P = .09; I (2) = 0%) or recurrent venous thromboembolism events (P = .52; I (2) = 58%). This meta-analysis showed that CDT may improve patency of the iliofemoral vein or severe PTS compared with anticoagulation therapy alone, but measuring PTS risk remains controversial. However, CDT could increase the risk of bleeding events, PE events, and duration of hospital stay. SAGE Publications 2017-11-13 2018-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6714738/ /pubmed/29132220 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029617739703 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Lu, Yongming
Chen, Linyi
Chen, Jinhui
Tang, Tao
Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
title Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
title_full Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
title_fullStr Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
title_full_unstemmed Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
title_short Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
title_sort catheter-directed thrombolysis versus standard anticoagulation for acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis: a meta-analysis of clinical trials
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6714738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29132220
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029617739703
work_keys_str_mv AT luyongming catheterdirectedthrombolysisversusstandardanticoagulationforacutelowerextremitydeepveinthrombosisametaanalysisofclinicaltrials
AT chenlinyi catheterdirectedthrombolysisversusstandardanticoagulationforacutelowerextremitydeepveinthrombosisametaanalysisofclinicaltrials
AT chenjinhui catheterdirectedthrombolysisversusstandardanticoagulationforacutelowerextremitydeepveinthrombosisametaanalysisofclinicaltrials
AT tangtao catheterdirectedthrombolysisversusstandardanticoagulationforacutelowerextremitydeepveinthrombosisametaanalysisofclinicaltrials