Robertson Lindsay, McBride Olivia, Burdess Anne
Department of Vascular Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, NE7 7DN.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 4;11(11):CD011536. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011536.pub2.
Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) occurs in approximately one in 1000 adults every year, and has an annual mortality of 14.6%. In particular, iliofemoral DVT can lead to recurrent thrombosis and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), a painful condition which can lead to chronic venous insufficiency, oedema, and ulceration. It causes significant disability, impaired quality of life, and economic burden. Early thrombus removal techniques have been advocated in patients with an iliofemoral DVT in order to improve vein patency, prevent valvular dysfunction, and reduce future complications, such as post-thrombotic syndrome and venous ulceration. One such technique is pharmacomechanical thrombectomy, a combination of catheter-based thrombectomy and catheter-directed thrombolysis.
To assess the effects of pharmacomechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulation (alone or with compression stockings), mechanical thrombectomy, thrombolysis, or other endovascular techniques in the management of people with acute DVT of the iliofemoral vein.
The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Specialised Register (last searched December 2015) and the Cochrane Register of Studies (last searched December 2015). We searched clinical trials databases for details of ongoing or unpublished studies and the reference lists of relevant articles retrieved by electronic searches for additional citations.
Randomised controlled trials in which patients with an iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis were allocated to receive pharmacomechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulation, mechanical thrombectomy, thrombolysis (systemic or catheter directed thrombolysis), or other endovascular techniques for the treatment of iliofemoral DVT.
At least two review authors independently assessed studies identified for potential inclusion.
We found no randomised controlled trials that met the eligibility criteria for this review. We identified one ongoing study.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There were no randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of pharmacomechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulation (alone or with compression stockings), mechanical thrombectomy, thrombolysis, or other endovascular techniques in the management of people with acute DVT of the iliofemoral vein that met the eligibility criteria for this review. Further high quality randomised controlled trials are needed.
深静脉血栓形成(DVT)每年在约千分之一的成年人中发生,年死亡率为14.6%。特别是髂股静脉DVT可导致复发性血栓形成和血栓后综合征(PTS),这是一种疼痛性疾病,可导致慢性静脉功能不全、水肿和溃疡。它会导致严重残疾、生活质量受损和经济负担。为了改善静脉通畅、预防瓣膜功能障碍并减少未来并发症,如血栓后综合征和静脉溃疡,已提倡对髂股静脉DVT患者采用早期血栓清除技术。一种这样的技术是药物机械性血栓切除术,它是基于导管的血栓切除术和导管定向溶栓的联合应用。
评估药物机械性血栓切除术与抗凝治疗(单独或联合压迫袜)、机械性血栓切除术、溶栓治疗或其他血管内技术在治疗髂股静脉急性DVT患者中的效果。
Cochrane血管信息专家检索了专业注册库(最后检索时间为2015年12月)和Cochrane研究注册库(最后检索时间为2015年12月)。我们检索了临床试验数据库以获取正在进行或未发表研究的详细信息,并检索了通过电子检索获得的相关文章的参考文献列表以获取更多引用。
随机对照试验,其中髂股深静脉血栓形成患者被分配接受药物机械性血栓切除术,与抗凝治疗、机械性血栓切除术、溶栓治疗(全身或导管定向溶栓)或其他血管内技术用于治疗髂股静脉DVT。
至少两名综述作者独立评估确定可能纳入的研究。
我们未发现符合本综述纳入标准的随机对照试验。我们确定了一项正在进行的研究。
没有随机对照试验评估药物机械性血栓切除术与抗凝治疗(单独或联合压迫袜)、机械性血栓切除术、溶栓治疗或其他血管内技术在治疗髂股静脉急性DVT患者中的效果,这些试验符合本综述的纳入标准。需要进一步的高质量随机对照试验。