Catheter-directed thrombolysis via two types of non-popliteal venous access in the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities:a comparative study
10.3969/j.issn.1008-794X.2025.07.005
- VernacularTitle:两种非腘静脉入路置管溶栓治疗急性下肢深静脉血栓形成效果比较
- Author:
Jian WANG
1
;
Cheng QIAN
;
Jianping GU
;
Libing GAO
;
Maofeng GONG
;
Liang LIU
;
Guoqing NI
;
Peng PENG
;
Guoping CHEN
Author Information
1. 211100 江苏南京 南京医科大学附属江宁医院放射介入科
- Keywords:
deep venous thrombosis;
lower extremity;
catheter-directed thrombolysis;
calf vein;
femoral vein;
puncture access
- From:
Journal of Interventional Radiology
2025;34(7):714-721
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the technical indicators and clinical effect of catheter-directed thrombolysis(CDT)via two types of non-popliteal venous access in the treatment of acute mixed-type lower extremity deep vein thrombosis(DVT).Methods The clinical data of 119 patients with acute mixed-type lower extremity DVT,who were admitted to the Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University and the Affiliated Nanjing Hospital of Nanjing Medical University of China to receive CDT treatment from January 2016 to June 2022,were retrospectively analyzed.Of the 119 patients,CDT via deep calf vein access was carries out in 45(calf vein group)and CDT via healthy-side femoral venous access was performed in 74(femoral vein group).The success rate of vascular puncture,success rate of catheterization technique,number of successful CDT venous puncturing,time spent for sheath placement,time spent for catheterization,thrombolysis time,used amount of thrombolytic agent and associated complications(including vein puncturing and anticoagulant thrombolysis-related complications),the thrombolytic effect of different anatomical segments,and the clinical efficacy during the follow-up period for at least 12 months were compared between the two groups.Results Successful catheterization via deep calf vein access and via healthy-side femoral vein access was obtained in 31 and 58 CDT patients respectively,with a technical success rate of 68.89％(31/45)and 78.38％(58/74)respectively,the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant(P=0.248).In 26 patients(67.74％)of the calf vein group,more than two times of puncturing were needed before the sheath placement could be successfully achieved.The time spent for sheath placement in the femoral vein group was(1.84±0.87)min,which was remarkably shorter than(10.52+6.13)min in the calf vein group(P＜0.001),but the time spent for catheterization in the femoral vein group was(41.60±13.31)min,which was obviously longer than(20.06+4.46)min in the calf vein group(P＜0.001).The thrombolysis time in the femoral vein group and the calf vein group was(5.34+1.43)days and(5.06±1.18)days respectively(P=0.354),and the used amount of thrombolytic agent in the femoral vein group was(352.16±71.98)×104 U,which was prominently larger than(284.68±77.64)× 104 U in the calf vein group(P＜0.001).The last follow-up check showed that the patency rate of the popliteal vein in the calf vein group was significantly higher than that in the femoral vein group(P=0.037).No statistically significant differences in the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome(PTS)and the mean VEINES-QOL/Sym scores existed between the two groups(all P＞0.05).Conclusion Compared with CDT via healthy-side femoral vein access,CDT via deep calf vein access can better remove the thrombus in the popliteal vein and superficial femoral vein,and improve the femoropopliteal vein patency rate,although it has no obvious advantages in reducing the occurrence of PTS and in improving the VEINES-QOL/Sym score,moreover,the deep calf vein puncture and sheath placement require a high-level technique.
