Search

Purpose: The aim of this paper was to report our experience with arterial and venous endovascular stent placement in the thoracic outlet (TO) and review available literature. Methods: All patients that underwent arterial or venous stent placement in the TO between 2013 and 2020 in 5 Dutch vascular teaching-hospitals were retrospectively identified. Primary endpoint was symptomatic stent failure due to stenosis, chronic or posture dependent compression, fracture, or occlusion of the stent. Secondary endpoints were symptoms at last follow-up and re-interventions. For the literature review, we searched studies reporting on stenting in the TO. Results: Twenty-six patients were included with 11 arterial and 15 venous stents implanted to treat angioplasty resistant stenosis in arterial or venous TO syndrome, iatrogenic or traumatic vascular injury, radiotherapy fibrosis, or arterial dissection. Median follow-up was 19 and 14 months in the arterial and venous-group, respectively. Eight (73%) patients in the arterial, and 9 (60%) in the venous-group suffered symptomatic stent failure. Seven (64%) patients in the arterial, and 9 (60%) in the venous-group required at least 1 re-intervention. When comparing all patients with stent placement after TO decompression (TOD) to patients without, there were substantially more symptomatic stent failures and re-interventions required in the patients without TOD. Six patients (54%) in the arterial-group and 11 (73%) in the venous-group were symptom-free at last follow-up. Five articles describing 51 patients with arterial and 6 articles describing 81 patients with venous stents were included in the literature review. In the arterial-group, no TOD prior to stent placement was performed, while in the venous-group all but 1 article performed TOD prior to stent placement. Results showed comparable rates of symptomatic stent failure (24% vs 30%), and patients requiring re-interventions (29% vs 21%) between groups. Conclusion: Based on our multicenter series and review, stents in the TO have a considerable risk of failure, both in the venous and the arterial territory. Especially in patients without TOD: the need for re-interventions is high and half the patients eventually undergo TOD. Based on the currently available data, stenting in the TO should be applied cautiously while TOD should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There is a lack of comprehensive and uniform data on primary upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (pUEDVT). pUEDVT includes venous thoracic outlet syndrome related upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (UEDVT) and idiopathic UEDVT. Research on these conditions has been hampered by their rarity, lack of uniform diagnostic criteria, and heterogeneity in therapeutic strategies. To improve current research data collection using input of all various pUEDVT treating medical specialists, we initiated the ThoRacic OuTlet Syndrome (TROTS) registry. The aim of the TROTS registry is to a) collect extensive data on all pUEDVT patients through a predefined protocol, b) give insight in the long term outcome using patient reported outcome measures, c) create guidance in the diagnostic and clinical management of these conditions, and thereby d) help provide content for future research., Methods and Analysis: The TROTS registry was designed as an international prospective longitudinal observational registry for data collection on pUEDVT patients. All pUEDVT patients, regardless of treatment received, can be included in the registry after informed consent is obtained. All relevant data regarding the initial presentation, diagnostics, treatment, and follow-up will be collected prospectively in an electronic case report form. In addition, a survey containing general questions, a Health-related Quality of Life questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), and Functional Disability questionnaire (Quick-DASH) will be sent periodically (at the time of inclusion, one and two years after inclusion, and every five years after inclusion) to the participant. The registry protocol was approved by the Medical Ethical Review Board and registered in the Netherlands Trial Register under Trial-ID NL9680. The data generated by the registry will be used for future research on pUEDVT and published in peer reviewed journals., Conclusion: TROTS registry data will be used to further establish the optimal management of pUEDVT and lay the foundation for future research and guidelines., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. TROTS registry collaborators: We have read the journal’s policy and three of the TROTS registry collaborators have the following competing interests: Vincent Jongkind has received financial support for research from Medtronic. Michiel Coppens has received financial support for research from Bayer, Roche, UniQure, and Novo Nordisk; Honoraria for lecturing from Bayer, CSL Behring, and Alexion; Fees for consulting from Sobi, Viatris, CSL Behring, Novo Nordisk, and Daiichi Sankyo; Travel support for attending meeting: Alexion, Sobi. Marieke J.H.A. Kruip has received an unrestricted grant from Sobi, payment to institute. Speakers fee from Sobi, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, payment to institute. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials., (Copyright: © 2023 Schropp et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)