急性下肢深静脉血栓的介入溶栓治疗与单纯抗凝治疗的疗效对比

目的与单纯抗凝治疗比较,评价下腔静脉滤器置入术后溶栓治疗急性下肢深静脉血栓形成（LEDVT）的效果。方法回顾性分析43例急性LEDVT患者资料,其中20例接受单纯抗凝治疗（单纯抗凝治疗组）;23例接受下腔静脉滤器置入术及术后溶栓治疗（溶栓治疗组）。测量两组治疗前、后患肢腿围,统计临床见效时间,比较两种治疗方法的临床疗效及其对预后的影响。结果两组患者治疗前、后患肢腿围均有缩小（P均〈0.05）,溶栓治疗组患肢腿围缩小程度较单纯抗凝治疗组明显（P〈0.05）;且溶栓治疗组患者临床恢复时间明显少于单纯抗凝治疗组患者（P〈0.05）。结论对于急性LEDVT患者,与单纯抗凝治疗相比,采用下腔静脉滤器置入术后溶栓治疗能明显缩短临床见效时间,明显改善临床症状。

A comparison of therapeutic efficacy between interventional treatment and anticoagulant treatment for acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of thrombolytic therapy after placement of inferior vena cava filter for acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LEDVT) by comparison with anticoagulant therapy.Methods Data of 43 patients with acute LEDVT were retrospectively analyzed, including 23 cases underwent thrombolysis therapy after placement of inferior vena cava filter (thrombolytic therapy group) and 20 cases received anticoagulant therapy (anticoagulant therapy group). Calf sizes of two groups were measured before and after treatment, respectively, and the clinical effective time of two groups were recorded. The clinical effective treatment time and the impact on prognosis were compared between two groups.Results The calf size of two groups both significantly reduced after treatment (both P<0.05), and the narrowing degree in thrombolytic therapy group was larger than that of anticoagulant therapy group (P<0.05). Patients in thrombolytic therapy group took less clinical recovery time than anticoagulant therapy group (P<0.05).Conclusion Compared with anticoagulant therapy, thrombolytic therapy after placement of inferior vena cava filter can significantly reduce clinical effective time and improve clinical symptoms for patients with acute LVDET.