Efficacy analysis of different endovascular thrombectomy systems for treating early lower extremity deep venous thrombosis
10.3969/j.issn.1673-9701.2025.27.008
- VernacularTitle:不同腔内血栓清除系统应用于早期下肢深静脉血栓的效果分析
- Author:
Xiangyao KONG
1
;
Zetao WU
1
Author Information
1. 宁波市医疗中心李惠利医院介入血管外科,浙江宁波 315000
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy;
Lower extremity deep venous thrombosis;
Complication;
Rheolytic thrombectomy system;
Large lumen catheter thrombectomy system
- From:
China Modern Doctor
2025;63(27):37-40
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To comparatively analyze the differences in clinical efficacy and safety between rheolytic and large-lumen catheter thrombectomy systems in the treatment of early-stage lower extremity deep venous thrombosis(LEDVT).Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 88 patients with LEDVT who underwent mechanical thrombectomy at Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital from January 2020 to October 2024.Patients were divided into group A(rheolytic thrombectomy system)and group B(large lumen catheter thrombectomy system).Perioperative parameters(operative duration,hospitalization duration),thrombus clearance rates were compared between two groups.Results The surgical success rate was 100％in both groups.No statistically significant differences were observed in hospitalization duration,operation duration,or thrombus clearance rate(P＞0.05).Regarding complications,the incidence of hematuria was significantly higher in group A than in group B.Three patients in group B experienced puncture site bleeding.Conclusion Both thrombectomy systems demonstrated favorable therapeutic effects in the early treatment of LEDVT.The rheolytic thrombectomy system warrants vigilance for the risk of hemolysis-related renal injury,and it is recommended to enhance perioperative renal function monitoring and renal protective measures.The large lumen catheter thrombectomy system has drawbacks,including puncture site bleeding,cumbersome operation,and potential damage to venous valves.Two different intracavitary thrombus clearing systems still need continuous improvement and innovation.
