Suppr超能文献

急性下肢深静脉血栓形成患者行 AngioJet 旋切血栓清除术后即刻行直接髂股动脉支架置入与分期支架置入的比较:导管直接溶栓联合 AngioJet 旋切血栓清除术后。

Comparison of Direct Iliofemoral Stenting Following AngioJet Rheolytic Thrombectomy vs Staged Stenting After AngioJet Rheolytic Thrombectomy Plus Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in Patients With Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis.

机构信息

1 Department of Vascular Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.

2 The Vascular Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

J Endovasc Ther. 2018 Feb;25(1):133-139. doi: 10.1177/1526602817714570. Epub 2017 Jun 16.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the treatment outcomes in patients with acute proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and iliofemoral stenosis who underwent either direct stenting after AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy or staged stenting after AngioJet thrombectomy plus catheter-directed thrombolysis with urokinase.

METHODS

From June 2014 to February 2016, 91 DVT patients underwent 2 treatments for duplex-verified iliofemoral stenosis: direct stenting (n = 46; mean age 54.8 years; 32 men) or staged stenting (n = 45; mean age 56.5 years; 27 men). The degree of patency after thrombectomy or thrombolysis was evaluated using the Venous Registry Index (VRI), while the risk of postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) was evaluated according to the Villalta scale. Patients were followed with periodic duplex ultrasound scans up to 1 year.

RESULTS

The technical success rates were 100% in both groups; there was no 30-day mortality. Immediate (24-hour) clinical improvement was achieved in 42 (91%) of 46 direct group patients vs 33 (73%) of 45 staged group patients (p<0.001). A significant reduction (p<0.001) in the length of hospital stay was noted in the direct group (4.59±0.91) compared with that in the staged group (5.8±1.6). The stents used in the direct group were longer but with similar diameter compared with the staged group. The thrombolysis rates were 81.50%±5.76% in the direct group and 85.67%±3.84% in the staged group (p<0.001). The VRIs declined (improved) significantly in both groups (11.68±1.92 to 3.21±1.44 in the direct group and 12.17±2.29 to 2.36±1.19 in the staged group, both p<0.001). The Villalta scores were significantly better in the staged group (p<0.001). Recurrent DVT occurred in 2 patients in the direct group. The primary patency rates at 1 year were 93.5% in the direct group and 97.8% in the staged group (p=0.323).

CONCLUSION

Both direct and staged stenting are effective treatment modalities for patients with acute proximal DVT. Compared with staged stenting, direct stenting provides similar treatment success and a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay; however, it has lower thrombolysis efficacy, and the risk of PTS at 1 year is greater with direct stenting.

摘要

目的

比较急性近端深静脉血栓形成(DVT)和髂股狭窄患者接受 AngioJet 旋切血栓清除术后直接支架置入或 AngioJet 血栓清除术加尿激酶导管溶栓后分期支架置入的治疗效果。

方法

2014 年 6 月至 2016 年 2 月,91 例经双功超声证实髂股狭窄的 DVT 患者接受了两种治疗:直接支架置入(n=46;平均年龄 54.8 岁;32 例男性)或分期支架置入(n=45;平均年龄 56.5 岁;27 例男性)。血栓清除或溶栓后通畅程度采用静脉登记指数(VRI)评估,血栓后综合征(PTS)风险根据 Villalta 量表评估。患者定期行双功超声检查,随访至 1 年。

结果

两组的技术成功率均为 100%;30 天内无死亡。直接组 46 例患者中有 42 例(91%)在 24 小时内获得即刻(24 小时)临床改善,分期组 45 例患者中有 33 例(73%)(p<0.001)。与分期组(5.8±1.6)相比,直接组(4.59±0.91)的住院时间显著缩短(p<0.001)。直接组使用的支架较长,但直径与分期组相似。直接组的溶栓率为 81.50%±5.76%,分期组为 85.67%±3.84%(p<0.001)。两组 VRI 均显著降低(p<0.001):直接组从 11.68±1.92 降至 3.21±1.44,分期组从 12.17±2.29 降至 2.36±1.19。分期组的 Villalta 评分显著更好(p<0.001)。直接组有 2 例患者发生复发性 DVT。直接组和分期组 1 年时的一期通畅率分别为 93.5%和 97.8%(p=0.323)。

结论

直接和分期支架置入都是急性近端 DVT 的有效治疗方法。与分期支架置入相比,直接支架置入提供了相似的治疗成功率,并显著缩短了住院时间;然而,其溶栓效果较低,直接支架置入 1 年时 PTS 的风险更高。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验