使用AngioJet ZelanteDVT导管或Solent Omni导管对近端静脉血栓形成患者进行血栓溶解切除术。
Rheolytic thrombectomy using an AngioJet ZelanteDVT catheter or a Solent Omni catheter for patients with proximal vein thrombosis.
作者信息
Gong Maofeng, Fu Guanqi, Liu Zhengli, Zhou Yangyi, Kong Jie, Zhao Boxiang, Lou Wensheng, Gu Jianping, He Xu
机构信息
Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210006, People's Republic of China.
出版信息
Thromb J. 2023 Mar 10;21(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s12959-023-00472-9.
PURPOSE
The present study aimed to investigate the preliminary safety and efficacy of rheolytic thrombectomy (RT) using an AngioJet Zelante DVT catheter or a Solent Omni catheter for acute proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We conducted a retrospective review of 40 patients who were treated with an AngioJet RT between January 2019 and January 2021, and then the patients were divided into the ZelanteDVT group (n = 17) and the Solent group (n = 23). Data on demographics, clinical characteristics, technical success, clinical success, complications, and early follow-up were analysed.
RESULTS
No significant differences regarding demographics were detected (all p > .05). The technical success rates were both 100%. The ZelanteDVT group had a shorter duration of RT and a higher primary RT success than the Solent group (all p < .05), and the percentage of adjunctive catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) was 29.4% in the ZelanteDVT group, which was significantly lower than the 73.9% in the Solent group (p = .010). The clinical success rates for the ZelanteDVT group and Solent group were 100% (17/17) and 95.7% (22/23), respectively, and these values were high in the two groups (p > .05). Apart from transient macroscopic haemoglobinuria occurring in all the patients during the first 24 hours post-RT, none of the patients in either group suffered other procedure-related adverse events or major complications. Minor complications included bleeding events in 21.7% (5/23) of the patients in the Solent group and one (5.9%) patient in the ZelanteDVT group (p > .05). At 6 months, the frequency of PTS was 5.9% (1/17) in the ZelanteDVT group and 17.4% (4/23) in the Solent group (p > .05).
CONCLUSION
Both catheters are safe and effective in managing patients with proximal DVT, thus leading to improved clinical outcomes with few complications. The ZelanteDVT catheter was more effective than the Solent catheter in thrombectomy, thus allowing for faster extraction of the DVT with a shorter run time and lower proportions of patients with adjunctive CDT.
目的
本研究旨在探讨使用AngioJet Zelante DVT导管或Solent Omni导管进行流变血栓切除术（RT）治疗急性近端深静脉血栓形成（DVT）的初步安全性和有效性。
材料与方法
我们对2019年1月至2021年1月期间接受AngioJet RT治疗的40例患者进行了回顾性分析，然后将患者分为ZelanteDVT组（n = 17）和Solent组（n = 23）。分析了人口统计学、临床特征、技术成功率、临床成功率、并发症及早期随访数据。
结果
未检测到人口统计学方面的显著差异（所有p > .05）。两组技术成功率均为100%。ZelanteDVT组的RT持续时间较短，初次RT成功率高于Solent组（所有p < .05），ZelanteDVT组辅助导管直接溶栓（CDT）的比例为29.4%，显著低于Solent组的73.9%（p = .010）。ZelanteDVT组和Solent组的临床成功率分别为100%（17/17）和95.7%（22/23），两组该数值均较高（p > .05）。除了所有患者在RT后24小时内均出现短暂肉眼血尿外，两组患者均未发生其他与手术相关的不良事件或严重并发症。轻微并发症包括Solent组21.7%（5/23）的患者和ZelanteDVT组1例（5.9%）的患者出现出血事件（p > .05）。6个月时，ZelanteDVT组的血栓后综合征（PTS）发生率为5.9%（1/17），Solent组为17.4%（4/23）（p > .05）。
结论
两种导管在治疗近端DVT患者时均安全有效，从而改善临床结局且并发症较少。ZelanteDVT导管在血栓切除术中比Solent导管更有效，因此能够更快地清除DVT，运行时间更短，辅助CDT的患者比例更低。
Zotero 插件