Treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis with apixaban and rivaroxaban

Randomized controlled trials leading to the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban for venous thromboembolism (VTE) did not include patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UE-DVT). We sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban for the treatment of acute UE-DVT. Consecutive patients with VTE enrolled into the Mayo Clinic VTE Registry, between March 1, 2013 and December 31, 2019, were followed prospectively. Clinical, demographic and imaging data were collected at the time of study recruitment. Patients with a diagnosis of acute UE-DVT who received rivaroxaban, apixaban, LMWH or warfarin were included. Recurrent VTE, major bleeding, clinical-relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), and death were assessed at 3-month intervals. During the study period, 210 patients with acute UE-DVT were included; 63 were treated with apixaban, 39 with rivaroxaban, and 108 with LWMH and/or warfarin. Overall 51% had catheter-associated UE-DVT, 60% had a diagnosis of malignancy, and 14% had concurrent pulmonary embolism. Malignancy was more common in patients treated with LMWH/warfarin (67% vs 52%, P = .03). At 3 months of follow up, one (0.9%) recurrent VTE occurred in a patient treated with LMWH/warfarin and one (1.0%) patient treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .97). Major bleeding occurred in three patients treated with LMWH/warfarin, and in none of those treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .09). Clinical-relevant non-major bleeding occurred in one patient (0.9%) treated with LWMH/warfarin and two patients (2.0%) treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (P = .53). Treatment of UE-DVT with apixaban or rivaroxaban appears to be as safe and effective as LMWH/warfarin.     

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

Upper extremities deep venous thrombosis (UEDVT) is a rare condition. According to the literature, approximately 4–10% of all cases of venous thrombosis may involve the subclavian, axillary or brachial veins. In the last few decades, the incidence of UEDVT has increased because of more frequent use of central venous catheters (CVCs) and cardiac pacemaker implantation. In addition, another common risk factor for UEDVT is cancer. UEDVT is classified as primary, approximately one-third of cases, which refers either to effort thrombosis or idiopathic UEDVT, or secondary, due to the presence of overt predisposing causes. The onset of UEDVT is usually characterized by arm swelling and pain, but may also be completely asymptomatic especially in patients with a long-term presence of a CVC. Ultrasonography represents a simple and accurate diagnostic tool to demonstrate the problem. UEDVT has major clinical consequences including pulmonary embolism, recurrences, post-thrombotic syndrome, and death. The role of thromboprophylaxis for those patients with a long-term CVC is still controversial. Unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin, followed by an oral anticoagulant are the most common treatments, with strategy of management similar to that of deep vein thrombosis of the leg. Thrombolysis/thrombectomy and surgical decompression are often successful, but less frequently used. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to clarify the optimal management of UEDVT, and to identify patients at the highest risk of recurrence who might benefit from long-term anticoagulation.     

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The susceptible populations and risk factors for UEDVT are well-known. The presenting symptoms can be subtle, and therefore objective testing is necessary for diagnosis. The optimal diagnostic strategy has not been determined, and more than one test may be required to exclude the diagnosis. Proper treatment reduces the occurrence of complications, and treatment should include long-term anticoagulation if the patient has no contraindications. This article discusses the risk factors, pathogenesis, diagnosis, complications, and management of UEDVT.     

髂静脉支架在急性下肢深静脉血栓形成伴髂静脉压迫综合征患者中的应用

目的 探讨下肢深静脉血栓形成(DVT)伴髂静脉压迫综合征(IVCS)患者血栓清除术后行髂静脉支架治疗的效果。方法 回顾性分析潍坊市人民医院2016年1月至2019年12月收治的83例急性下肢DVT伴IVCS、行血栓清除术患者的临床资料,其中单纯药物治疗组32例,支架治疗组51例。观察2组患者出院时肢体消肿率,术后6、12个月静脉通畅率及Villalta评分。采用SPSS 22.0统计软件进行数据分析。根据数据类型,分别采用t检验、χ²检验或Fisher确切概率检验进行组间比较。结果 单纯药物治疗组大腿与小腿消肿率分别为(29.75±11.74)%和(30.40±10.79)%,支架治疗组分别为(64.35±12.67)%和(61.0±18.89)%;单纯药物治疗组术后6、12个月静脉通畅率分别为87.50%和75.00%,支架治疗组分别为96.07%和92.15%;单纯药物治疗组术后6、12个月Villalta评分分别为(8.16±1.80)和(7.44±1.50),支架治疗组分别为(6.76±2.40)和(6.17±2.11);2组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。结论 下肢DVT伴IVCS患者血栓清除术后一期行髂静脉支架治疗能显著提高静脉通畅率,改善下肢症状。     

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

Upper extremity deep-vein thrombosis has recently been recognized as being a more common and less benign disease than previously reported. It arises generally in the presence of recognizable risk factors, such as central venous catheters and cancer. However, as many as 20% of patients present with apparently spontaneous episodes. The prevalence of inherited coagulation defects in patients with this disease ranges from 10% to 26%. The clinical picture of upper extremity DVT is characterized by pain, edema, and functional impairment, although it may be completely asymptomatic. Because the prevalence of this thrombotic disease is less than 50% among symptomatic subjects, objective diagnosis is mandatory prior to instituting an anticoagulant treatment. When available, compression ultrasonography (alone or associated with Doppler or color Doppler facilities) should be the preferred initial diagnostic test. However, contrast venography may be necessary before anticoagulants are withheld because of negative findings on compression ultrasonography. Pulmonary embolism complicates upper extremity deep-vein thrombosis in up to 36% of patients and may even be the presenting manifestation of this disorder. Its long-term clinical course is complicated by recurrent thromboembolism and post-thrombotic sequelae. Among the therapeutic options advocated for the therapy of upper extremity deep-vein thrombosis, unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin followed by at least 3 months of oral anticoagulants should be regarded as the treatment of choice. Thrombolysis and surgical procedures may be indicated in selected cases. The prevention of this disease requires the institution of appropriate pharmacologic measures (i.e., low-dose unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin or low-dose warfarin) whenever an indwelling central venous catheter is indicated. This review suggests that upper extremity deep-vein thrombosis is at least as serious a disease entity as deep-vein thrombosis of the lower extremities.     

Thrombophilia differences in splanchnic vein thrombosis and lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in North America

Background

The utility of thrombophilia testing in patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis (SpVT) has not previously been rigorously evaluated. The purpose of this study was to characterize differences in the prevalence of thrombophilia in patients with SpVT involving portal (PVT), mesenteric (MVT), splenic (SVT), or hepatic (HVT) veins in isolation or with multisegmental (M-SpVT) involvement compared to patients with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

Methods

An inception cohort of patients with incident SpVT was identified for whom comprehensive thrombophilia testing was performed between 1995 and 2005 and compared to DVT controls.

Results

341 patients with SpVT (mean age 50 ± 16 years, 53 % women) including isolated PVT (n = 112), MVT (n = 67), HVT (n = 22), SVT (n = 11), and M-SpVT (n = 129) involvement and 3621 DVT controls (mean age 55 ± 16 years, 56 % women) had comprehensive thrombophilia testing. The prevalence of abnormal results was similar for SpVT (24.6 %) and DVT (25.9 %) patients. “Strong” thrombophilias were more prevalent among SpVT patients (12.3 vs. 8.5 %, p = 0.0168). Patients with splenic (45.5 %) and mesenteric (41.8 %) thrombosis had the highest thrombophilia prevalence. Protein S deficiency was more common in SpVT patients (3.5 vs. 0.9 %, p < 0.001). In contrast, FV Leiden was more prevalent among DVT patients (15.8 vs. 10.9 %, p = 0.0497).

Conclusion

The prevalence of selected thrombophilia factors differ comparing SpVT and DVT patients. The prevalence is particularly high for patients with splenic and mesenteric vein thrombosis. Whereby the finding of strong thrombophilia impacts duration of anticoagulant therapy, such testing is warranted in the evaluation of patients with unprovoked SpVT.     

Popliteal cysts are not a risk factor for lower extremity deep vein thrombosis

Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis - Popliteal cysts (PC) result from distension of the gastrocnemio-semimembranosous bursa. Published reports indicate coincident PC and deep vein thrombosis...     

AngioJet机械吸栓装置在急性下肢深静脉血栓形成中的应用

［摘要］　目的　通过对比分析导管接触性溶栓（CDT）与AngioJet机械吸栓术在急性下肢深静脉血栓形成的治疗效果。方法　回顾性分析2018-01～2019-11安徽医科大学第二附属医院血管外科收治的34例经介入手术治疗的急性下肢深静脉血栓形成患者的临床资料,其中18例行CDT治疗（CDT组）,16例行AngioJet机械吸栓治疗（AngioJet组）。比较两组患者手术前后D-二聚体（D-D）峰值及纤维蛋白原值、术后下肢消肿率及血栓清除率。结果　34例患者均顺利完成手术。CDT组即刻血栓清除率、消肿率均低于AngioJet组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后CDT组的D-D峰值及尿激酶用量均高于AngioJet组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论　AngioJet机械吸栓装置在急性下肢深静脉血栓形成治疗中具有更高的血栓清除率及安全性,对指导临床应用有一定的意义。     

经皮腘静脉穿刺诊治下肢深静脉血栓39例临床分析

目的探讨经皮腘静脉血流顺向性介入治疗下肢深静脉血栓的可行性。方法对39例下肢深静脉血栓患者经健侧股静脉置入下腔静脉滤器后,穿刺患侧腘静脉,以腘静脉为入路,行血管内溶栓、血栓消融器消融和(或)球囊成形及腔内支架置人术等治疗。结果经皮腘静脉穿刺均获成功,无严重并发症发生。结论以患侧腘静脉为入路,血流顺行性介入治疗下肢深静脉血栓操作简便,是一种安全有效的方法。     

妇科盆腔阴式手术后并发下肢深静脉血栓40例诊治探讨

目的：探讨妇科盆腔阴式手术后并发下肢深静脉血栓（ LEDVT）的临床治疗效果。方法回顾性分析40例妇科盆腔阴式手术并发LEDVT患者的临床表现特点、诊断及治疗方法。结果妇科盆腔阴式手术后LEDVT的发生率为1％（40／4000）,采用复方丹参注射液、低分子肝素钙注射液及低分子右旋糖肝注射液,或者加用活血化瘀中药、路路通及阿司匹林等药物治疗后,40例LEDVT均治愈。随访3个月～2年,所有患者均无后遗症出现。结论对妇科盆腔阴式手术后的LEDVT患者,应做到早诊断、早治疗,可获得满意的疗效。     

经皮胭静脉穿刺诊治下肢深静脉血栓39例临床分析

目的探讨经皮胭静脉血流顺向性介入治疗下肢深静脉血栓的可行性。方法对39例下肢深静脉血栓患者经健侧股静脉置入下腔静脉滤器后，穿刺患侧胭静脉，以胭静脉为人路，行血管内溶栓、血栓消融器消融和（或）球囊成形及腔内支架置人术等治疗。结果经皮胭静脉穿刺均获成功，无严重并发症发生。结论以患侧胭静脉为人路，血流顺行性介入治疗下肢深静脉血栓操作简便，是一种安全有效的方法。     

Routine surveillance of pelvic and lower extremity deep vein thrombosis in stroke patients with patent foramen ovale

Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis - Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a potential conduit for paradoxical embolization to the systemic atrial circulation of a thrombus originating in the venous...     

Endometriosis causing lower extremity deep vein thrombosis - case report and review of the literature

Endometriosis is a medical condition in women wherein endometrial cells deposited in the area outside the uterine cavity are influenced by hormonal changes, and produce symptoms depending on the site of implantation. A unique case of retroperitoneal endometriosis causing deep vein thrombosis from extrinsic compression of the right iliac vein is described. Clinical presentation with cyclical leg swelling, coincidental with menstruation and culminating with deep vein thrombosis, although very suggestive, has not been previously reported.     

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: a community-based perspective

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine the magnitude, risk factors, management strategies, and outcomes in a population-based investigation of patients with upper, as compared with lower, extremity deep vein thrombosis diagnosed in 1999.

Methods

The medical records of all residents from Worcester, Massachusetts (2000 census = 478,000) diagnosed with ICD-9 codes consistent with possible deep vein thrombosis at all Worcester hospitals during 1999 were reviewed and validated.

Results

The age-adjusted attack rate (per 100,000 population) of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis was 16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 13-20) compared with 91 (95% CI, 83-100) for lower extremity deep vein thrombosis. Patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis were significantly more likely to have undergone recent central line placement, a cardiac procedure, or an intensive care unit admission than patients with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis. Although short-term and 1-year recurrence rates of venous thromboembolism and all-cause mortality were not significantly different between patients with upper, versus lower, extremity deep vein thrombosis, patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis were less likely to have pulmonary embolism at presentation or in follow-up.

Conclusions

Patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis represent a clinically important patient population in the community setting. Risk factors, occurrence of pulmonary embolism, and timing and location of venous thromboembolism recurrence differ between patients with upper as compared with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis. These data suggest that strategies for prophylaxis and treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis need further study and refinement.