The Results of Aspiration Thrombectomy for the Endovascular Treatment of Ileofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis.
- Author:
Man Woo PARK
1
;
Woo Hyung KWUN
;
Bo Yang SUH
;
Won Kyu PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University, Daegu, Korea. whkwun@med.yu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Aspiration thrombectomy;
Ilio-femoral venous thrombosis
- MeSH:
Demography;
Fibrinolytic Agents;
Humans;
Thrombectomy;
Thrombosis;
Urokinase-Type Plasminogen Activator;
Veins
- From:Journal of the Korean Society for Vascular Surgery
2009;25(1):17-22
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study was performed to evaluate the effect of aspiration thrombectomy for the treatment of ileofemoral deep vein thrombosis. METHODS: We reviewed the records of sixty-two patients who were treated with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) at our institution between November 2001 and October 2007. The patients were divided into two groups: those who were treated by CDT with aspiration thrombectomy (AT) (the aspiration group; 33 patients) or those who were treated with using CDT alone (the CDT alone group; 29 patients). The obtained data included the demographics, the procedural details, the periprocedural evaluation and the thrombus resolution. RESULTS: The treatment time with using CDT only was 40.93+/-15.59 hours compared with 23.18+/-8.22 hours with using AT (P<0.001). The mean dose of urokinase with using CDT only was 2.48+/-0.82 million IU as compared with 1.60+/-0.54 million IU with using AT (P<0.001). The use of AT did not improve the overall lytic success (P=0.084), but more patients had complete thrombus resolution (13 vs. 22 patients, respectively). There was no difference in symptom improvement or the long term patency rate between the two groups. There was no major morbidity or mortality. The prophylactic IVC filters were inserted in 31 patients and entrapped thrombi were founded in 3 patients of the aspiration group. Evidence of venous reflux was identified in the CDT only group (3 patients; 10.4%). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the use of AT offers more effective thrombus removal in less time and with using a lower dose of thrombolytic agents. When performing AT treatment, prophylactic IVC filter insertion should be considered for preventing floating thrombi.
