Clinical study of comprehensive endovascular treatment for acute deep vein thrombosis in elderly patients
10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-9026.2019.10.019
- VernacularTitle: 老年急性下肢深静脉血栓形成患者腔内综合治疗的研究
- Author:
Maofeng GONG
1
;
Guoping CHEN
;
Jianping GU
;
Xu HE
;
Wensheng LOU
;
Liang CHEN
;
Haobo SU
;
Jinhua SONG
;
Wanyin SHI
;
Boxiang ZHAO
Author Information
1. Department of Interventional Radiology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210006, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Venous thrombosis;
Thrombolytic therapy;
Radiology, interventional
- From:
Chinese Journal of Geriatrics
2019;38(10):1137-1141
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the safety and clinical efficacy of comprehensive endovascular treatment for acute deep vein thrombosis(DVT)in elderly patients.
Methods:Clinical data of 94 elderly patients who underwent endovascular treatment from June 2013 to June 2016 were retrospectively analyzed.All patients underwent inferior vena cava filter implantation(IVCF). Of them, 57 patients initially underwent thrombectomy and subsequently received the adjunctive catheter-directed thrombolysis(CDT)(Group A)and 37 cases underwent CDT(Group B). Clinical efficacy and safety of treatments in the two groups were examined.
Results:Among the 94 patients, 88 cases had retrievable IVCF, and the retrieval rate was 94.3%(83/88). There were significant differences in total infusion time(73.92±31.68 h vs.156.2±30.2 h)and total doses of infused thrombolytic agents(180.71±44.83 million unit vs.355.0±96.0 million unit)between Groups A and B(P<0.05). There was a significant difference in average hospitalized time between Groups A and B(9.4±2.4 d vs.12.8±4.3 d, t=-4.99, P<0.01). There was no significant difference in clinical efficacy between Groups A and B(χ2=1.263, P>0.05). Fifty-six patients were treated with angioplasty(PTA), 34 of them were combined with stent implantation, and there was no difference between the two groups(χ2=1.128, P>0.05). Neither of the two groups saw serious complications.The incidence of minor hemorrhage was 9.6%(9/94), including 2 cases and 7 cases in Group A and Group B respectively, and the difference was statistically significant(χ2=4.503, P=0.034). The average follow-up time was 16.7±8.3 months in the 94 patients, and the stent patency rate was 91.2%(31/34). Doppler ultrasonography results at the last follow-up showed that the reverse flow rate of the valve was 20.2%(19/94), the occurrence rates of post-thrombotic syndrome(PTS)were 24.6%(14/57)and 29.7%(11/37)in Group A and Group B respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant(χ2=0.307, P=0.580). Patients in the mild, moderate and severe stages assessed by Villata scoring were 9 vs.6, 4 vs.5, 0 vs.1 in Group A and Group B respectively, and the differences were not statistically significant(χ2=0.007 and 0.205, P>0.05).
Conclusions:It is safe and effective for elderly patients with DVT when timely and appropriate the treatment strategies are chosen and comprehensive approaches including IVCF, anticoagulation, endovascular CDT, thrombectomy, PTA and stent implantation are used.
