Catheter-directed thrombolysis plus anticoagulation versus anticoagulation alone in the treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis - a meta-analysis

被引:49
|
作者
Du, Guo-Cheng [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Mao-Chun [3 ]
Zhao, Ji-Chun [1 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Univ, Dept Vasc Surg, West China Hosp, Chengdu 610064, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[2] Nanchong Centrary Hosp, Dept Vasc Surg, Nanchong, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[3] North Sichuan Med Coll, Affiliated Hosp, Dept Diagnost Ultrasound Obstet & Gynecol, Nanchong, Sichuan, Peoples R China
关键词
Deep vein thrombosis; catheter-directed thrombolysis; anticoagulation; meta-analysis; VENOUS THROMBOSIS; POSTTHROMBOTIC SYNDROME; VALVE FUNCTION; THERAPY; EFFICACY; PREVENTION; QUALITY; SAFETY;
D O I
10.1024/0301-1526/a000430
中图分类号
R6 [外科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100210 ;
摘要
Background: The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) plus anticoagulation with anticoagulation alone in patients with lower-extremity proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Patients and methods: We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to October, 2014. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies comparing the clinical outcomes between additional CDT and anticoagulation alone were included. The primary outcomes were postthrombotic syndrome and major bleeding complications. The secondary outcomes included the iliofemoral patency rate, deep venous function, mortality, pulmonary embolism, and recurrent DVT. Results: Three RCTs and 3 non-randomized studies were included. Compared with standard anticoagulation treatment, additional CDT was associated with a significantly higher rate of complete lysis within 30 days (OR = 91; 95% CI 19.28 to 429.46), a higher rate of 6-month patency (OR = 5.77; 95% CI 1.99 to 16.73), a lower rate of postthrombotic syndrome (OR = 0.4; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.96), and a lower rate of venous obstruction (OR = 0.20; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.44). More major bleeding episodes occurred in the CDT group (Peto OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.62 to 2.62). CDT was not found to reduce mortality, pulmonary embolism, or recurrent DVT. Conclusions: Additional CDT therapy appeared to be more effective than standard anticoagulation treatment in improving the venous patency and preventing venous obstruction and postthrombotic syndrome. Caution should be taken when performing CDT given the increased risk of major bleeding. However, no evidence supported benefits of CDT in reducing mortality, recurrent DVT, or pulmonary embolism.
引用
收藏
页码:195 / 202
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The case against catheter-directed thrombolysis in patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis
    Poston, Jacqueline N.
    Garcia, David A.
    BLOOD ADVANCES, 2018, 2 (14) : 1803 - 1805
  • [32] AngioJet Thrombectomy Versus Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
    Li, Guan Qiang
    Wang, Lei
    Zhang, Xi Cheng
    CLINICAL AND APPLIED THROMBOSIS-HEMOSTASIS, 2021, 27
  • [33] Acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis: does catheter-directed thrombolysis affect outcomes?
    Abd El-Mabooda, El-Sayed A.
    Sorour, Waleed A.
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2020, 39 (02) : 325 - 337
  • [34] Predictors of intracranial hemorrhage in patients treated with catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis
    Lakhter, Vladimir
    Zack, Chad J.
    Brailovsky, Yevgeniy
    Azizi, Abdul Hussain
    Weinberg, Ido
    Rosenfield, Kenneth
    Schainfeld, Robert
    Kolluri, Raghu
    Katz, Paul
    Zhao, Huaqing
    Bashir, Riyaz
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY-VENOUS AND LYMPHATIC DISORDERS, 2021, 9 (03) : 627 - +
  • [35] Indications for Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in the Management of Acute Proximal Deep Venous Thrombosis
    Patterson, Benjamin O.
    Hinchliffe, Robert
    Loftus, Ian M.
    Thompson, Matt M.
    Holt, Peter J. E.
    ARTERIOSCLEROSIS THROMBOSIS AND VASCULAR BIOLOGY, 2010, 30 (04) : 669 - 674
  • [36] Pulsatile injections versus continuous infusion in catheter-directed thrombolysis for proximal iliofemoropopliteal deep vein thrombosis
    Naga, Ahmad R.
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 40 (02) : 577 - 584
  • [37] Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Versus Standard Anticoagulation in Patients With Proximal Deep Vein Thrombosis Results From the ATTRACT Trial
    Magnuson, Elizabeth A.
    Chinnakondepalli, Khaja
    Vilain, Katherine
    Kearon, Clive
    Julian, Jim A.
    Kahn, Susan R.
    Goldhaber, Samuel Z.
    Jaff, Michael R.
    Kindzelski, Andrei L.
    Herman, Kevin
    Brady, Paul S.
    Sharma, Karun
    Black, Carl M.
    Vedantham, Suresh
    Cohen, David J.
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY AND OUTCOMES, 2019, 12 (10):
  • [38] A systematic review of ultrasound-accelerated catheter-directed thrombolysis in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis
    Shi, Yadong
    Shi, Wanyin
    Chen, Liang
    Gu, Jianping
    JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND THROMBOLYSIS, 2018, 45 (03) : 440 - 451
  • [39] Treatment of Chronic Deep Vein Thrombosis Using Ultrasound Accelerated Catheter-directed Thrombolysis
    Dumantepe, M.
    Tarhan, I. A.
    Ozler, A.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2013, 46 (03) : 366 - 371
  • [40] Comparative outcomes of catheter-directed thrombolysis plus rivaroxaban vs rivaroxaban alone in patients with acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis
    Tsai, Chia Ju
    Lee, Chiu-Yang
    JOURNAL OF THE CHINESE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2019, 82 (12) : 902 - 908