Outcomes withcatheter-directedthrombolysis compared with anticoagulation alone in patients with acute deep venous thrombosis

Objective The authors aimed to investigate the benefits and risks of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) in acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Background The role of CDT in the management of DVT is evolving. Data on CDT versus anticoagulation alone in acute DVT is sparse. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that compared CDT to anticoagulation alone in patients with acute DVT. Results We included 11 studies (four randomized control trials [RCTs] and seven observational studies) with a total of 8,737 patients. During hospital stay, patients who received CDT had higher odds of major bleeding (2.5% vs. 1.6%; OR 1.46, 95% CI [1.07, 1.98],p= .02), blood transfusion (10.8% vs. 6.2%; OR 1.8, 95% CI [1.52, 2.13],p < .001), and thromboembolism (15.5% vs. 10%; OR 1.67, 95% CI [1.47, 1.91],p < .001) compared with anticoagulation alone. At 6-month follow-up, patients who received CDT had higher venous patency (71.1% vs. 37.7%; OR 5.49, 95% CI [2.63, 11.5],p < .001) and lower postthrombotic syndrome (PTS; 27% vs. 40.7%; OR 0.44, 95% CI [0.22, 0.86],p= .02). During a mean follow-up duration of 30.5 +/- 28 months, CDT group continued to have higher venous patency (79.6% vs. 71.8%; OR 3.79, 95% CI [1.54, 9.32],p= .004) and lower PTS (44.7% vs. 50.5%; OR 0.43, 95% CI [0.23, 0.78],p= .006), but no difference in thromboembolism. Conclusion Compared with anticoagulation alone, CDT for patients with acute DVT was associated with a higher risk of complications, but a higher rate of venous patency and lower risk of postthrombotic syndrome at 2.5 years follow-up.