Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Fla.
Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Fla.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2019 Mar;7(2):260-271.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2018.12.009. Epub 2019 Jan 16.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether compression stockings or other interventions reduce the incidence of venous ulceration after acute deep venous thrombosis.
We searched PubMed and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), restricted to English, Spanish, and Hebrew, related to post-thrombotic syndrome and venous ulceration in participants with confirmed deep venous thrombosis. Our primary statistical assessment was the Peto odds ratio (OR).
Our search generated 23 RCTs meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, summing 6162 patients and 146 ulcerative events. Trials were categorized into compression, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), procedural thrombolysis, medical thrombolysis, or miscellaneous. Six compression trials were identified, of which five were included in meta-analysis. Compression compared with placebo did not reduce venous ulceration (OR, 0.915; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.475-1.765), and long-term compression was not superior to short-term compression (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.014-1.31). Four LMWH trials were identified but were not subjected to meta-analysis because of intertrial heterogeneity. One trial, comparing extended tinzaparin with warfarin, demonstrated eight ulcers in the warfarin group and one ulcer in the LMWH group (relative risk, 0.125; P < .05). Three procedural thrombolysis trials were pooled into meta-analysis; fewer ulcerative events occurred in procedural thrombolysis patients, but the effect was not significant (OR, 0.677; 95% CI, 0.338-1.358). Eight medical thrombolysis trials were identified. Pooled analysis of five trials demonstrated a protective effect on ulceration in streptokinase patients vs standard heparinization (OR, 0.125; 95% CI, 0.021-0.739). However, these trials were of poor-quality study design, had small sample size, and had poor overall outcomes. Miscellaneous studies included a trial of hidrosmina, a vasoactive flavonoid, and a trial comparing 6-month warfarin treatment with 6 weeks; neither trial had significant outcomes. Intertrial heterogeneity was not adequately assessed with the I value as venous ulceration is a rare event; the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation evidence for most trials was very low, with the exception of procedural thrombolysis trials, for which it was low.
We found insufficient evidence to assess whether compression or other interventions protect against venous ulceration. To develop guidelines for treatment decisions related to prevention of venous ulceration, high-powered RCTs investigating venous leg ulcers as a primary outcome are required.
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在评估加压袜或其他干预措施是否能降低急性深静脉血栓形成后静脉溃疡的发生率。
我们在 PubMed 和 Embase 上检索了与深静脉血栓形成患者的血栓后综合征和静脉溃疡相关的随机对照试验(RCT),仅限于英文、西班牙语和希伯来语。我们的主要统计评估是 Peto 比值比(OR)。
我们的搜索生成了 23 项符合纳入和排除标准的 RCT,总计 6162 名患者和 146 例溃疡事件。试验分为加压、低分子肝素(LMWH)、程序性溶栓、内科溶栓或其他类别。确定了 6 项加压试验,其中 5 项被纳入荟萃分析。与安慰剂相比,加压并未降低静脉溃疡的发生率(OR,0.915;95%置信区间[CI],0.475-1.765),且长期加压并不优于短期加压(OR,1.36;95% CI,0.014-1.31)。确定了 4 项 LMWH 试验,但由于试验间异质性,未进行荟萃分析。一项比较延长达肝素与华法林的试验显示,华法林组有 8 例溃疡,LMWH 组有 1 例溃疡(相对风险,0.125;P<.05)。3 项程序性溶栓试验被汇总进行荟萃分析;程序性溶栓患者的溃疡事件较少,但效果不显著(OR,0.677;95% CI,0.338-1.358)。确定了 8 项内科溶栓试验。对 5 项试验的汇总分析显示,链激酶患者的溃疡发生率低于标准肝素化患者(OR,0.125;95% CI,0.021-0.739)。然而,这些试验的研究设计质量较差,样本量较小,总体结局较差。其他研究包括一项关于 hidrosmina(一种血管活性类黄酮)的试验和一项比较华法林 6 个月治疗与 6 周治疗的试验;这两项试验均无显著结果。由于静脉溃疡是一种罕见事件,无法充分评估 I 值来评估试验间异质性;除了程序性溶栓试验,大多数试验的推荐评估、制定与评价证据等级都非常低,而这些试验的等级为低。
我们发现没有足够的证据来评估加压或其他干预措施是否能预防静脉溃疡。为了制定与预防静脉溃疡相关的治疗决策指南,需要进行以静脉腿部溃疡为主要结局的、有影响力的 RCT。