Search

Context Anticoagulant therapy remains the prevalent treatment for venous thromboembolism. In the new era of percutaneous endovenous intervention, there is a progressive rise in the use of percutaneous endoluminal clot dissolution techniques such as using catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and mechanical aspiration thrombectomy (MAT) devices due to their established short-term benefits. Prophylactic deployment of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter during percutaneous endovenous therapy for lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is still a debatable issue. Aims Our study aims to assess retrospectively the frequency of embolization and the need for deployment of a retrievable IVC filter during endovenous treatment of proximal lower extremity DVT using percutaneous CDT and MAT techniques. Settings and design Retrospective. Patients and methods Percutaneous endoluminal clot dissolution using either CDT or MAT for proximal lower extremity DVT was performed on 64 limbs in 58 patients of 148 patients diagnosed with proximal acute/subacute DVT in the Vascular Surgery Department of the study hospitals. An IVC filter was deployed in 32 patients prior or during the procedure. Statistical analysis Statistical analysis was performed by using IBM SPSS Statistics, version 22, for Windows program package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA). Results From 58 patients who were treated for proximal DVT with clot debulking procedures, the IVC filter was prophylactically deployed in 30 (51.7%) patients. Trapped thrombus in the deployed filters as revealed on venocavography was observed in 8/30 (26.7%) filters deployed prophylactically with an overall rate of thrombus embolization during percutaneous endovenous thrombus dissolution techniques was 11/58 (18.9%) patients. Conclusion CDT could be done safely and effectively without routine prophylactic IVC filter placement in treating acute DVT. Selective filter placement may be considered in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy or patients with more proximal thrombus pattern with multiple risk factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Bare-metal stent (BMS) scaffolding of superficial femoral artery occlusive lesions has been associated with high rates of late clinical failure. Maintaining the patency of recanalized arterial segments was the main issue behind the concept of leaving nothing behind to be evolved and percutaneous balloon angioplasty becomes the preferred option for endovascular therapy. Drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) have shown to be an effective alternative to BMS for patients with de novo complex superficial femoral occlusive disease. Aims The aim was to compare the outcome of DEB versus BMS in treating complex chronic total occlusion of superficial femoral and proximal popliteal artery in patients with disabling claudication and critical limb ischemia regarding technical success, primary patency, clinically driven target lesion revascularization (cd-TLR), and limb salvage rate. Materials and methods The current study is a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Ninety patients (110 limbs) complaining of disabling and critical limb ischemia due to complex femoropopliteal occlusive lesions were randomly allocated into two groups according to the intervention method performed. Group A included 48 patients (57 limbs) who were submitted for treatment with paclitaxel DEBs and group B included 42 patients (53 limbs) submitted for treatment with BMS. The follow-up period was for 1, 6, and 12 months. Statistical analysis was performed by using the IBM SPSS Statistics version 22 for Windows Program Package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Results BMSs seem to have lower patency and higher cd-TLR rates compared with patients who received paclitaxel drug-coated balloons but was not statistically significant. The primary patency rates were 100, 96, and 86.2% at 1, 6, and 12 months' respectively' in the DEB group versus 100, 89.8, and 77.6% at 1, 6, and 12 months, respectively, in the BMS group. Clinically driven TLR rates were 2 and 7.8% at 6 and 12 months, respectively, in the DEB group versus 6.1 and 14.2% at 6 and 12 months, respectively, in the BMS group. Conclusion Percutaneous therapy for Trans atlantic inter-societies consensus (TASC) C and D femoropopliteal lesion using DEB or BMS is safe and effective with a high patency rate of 1 year. Paclitaxel drug-eluting balloons seem to have a promising role in the prevention of restenosis and recurrence of peripheral arterial occlusive disease. However, stents are still playing important bailout role in the treatment of residual stenosis and dissection. Further follow-up is essential to obtain and document long-term outcome of different percutaneous therapy for complex and long superficial femoral artery (SFA) lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]