Why the study?
Does active thrombus removal (thrombolysis or thrombectomy) improve luminal patency and restore valvular function compared to standard anticoagulation in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis?
Does active thrombus removal (thrombolysis or thrombectomy) improve luminal patency and restore valvular function compared to standard anticoagulation in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis?
Active thrombus removal strategies such as thrombolysis or thrombectomy may offer advantages over standard anticoagulation by improving luminal patency and restoring valvular function in acute deep vein thrombosis.
Should not yet change practice in acute DVT; leaves open need for RCTs on clinical outcomes.
Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a significant health problem, leading to the hospital admission of over 250,000 Americans each year. Its most serious acute complication, namely pulmonary embolus, kills approximately 100,000 each year, and is the third most common cardiovascular related mortality after myocardial infarction and stroke. Chronic leg problems following DVT include leg heaviness, tiredness, cramping and ulceration. These are termed the post-thrombotic syndrome. The current standard therapy of anticoagulation has changed little over 50 years. It does not remove or destroy thrombus, relying instead on the bodies own fibrinolytic mechanisms to do so. DVT needs to be more accurately categorized on an anatomical basis, and for a variety of reasons, the area of most importance is the iliofemoral region. The rationale for active, rather than passive, thrombus removal relies on multiple observations that, by doing so improves luminal patency, restores valvular function and has the potential to reduce th...
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gerard J. O’Sullivan (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: