Fan Shengxin, Fu Binyan, Liu Jiazhou, Liu Yuliang, Wang Xiaohui, Chen Hong
Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No.1 Youyi Road, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Chongqing Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine and Prevention of Major Respiratory Diseases, Chongqing, China.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2025 Sep 1;25(1):646. doi: 10.1186/s12872-025-05087-8.
Anticoagulation for isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (IDDVT) in critically ill patients remains controversial. The aim of our study was to assess whether anticoagulation could benefit critically ill patients with IDDVT.
We identified critically ill patients with IDDVT diagnosed by ultrasound from June 2022 to June 2023 and divided them into anticoagulation and non-anticoagulation groups retrospectively. The primary outcome was thrombus propagation, defined as a composite of pulmonary embolism (PE) and proximal deep vein thrombosis (PDVT). The secondary outcomes included PE, PDVT, thrombus resolution, major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding and all-cause mortality. The follow-up period was from the day of IDDVT diagnosis to the time of discharge/death. After propensity score matching (PSM), the incidence of outcomes was compared and risk factors for thrombus propagation/bleeding were analyzed.
A total of 261 patients were included for analysis, 115 in the non-anticoagulation group and 146 in the anticoagulation group. After PSM, 53 pairs of patients were well-matched. The incidence of thrombus propagation was significantly lower in the anticoagulation group than in the non-anticoagulation group (5.7% vs. 18.9%, P = 0.038). However, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of secondary outcomes between the two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that over 70% of patients received low-dose rather than standard-dose anticoagulation, particularly those with coagulopathy and deep vein catheterization, and no significant differences were observed in any outcomes between the two subgroups. Finally, surgery (OR 3.959, 95% CI 1.101-14.233, P = 0.035) was an independent risk factor for thrombus propagation, while early anticoagulation (OR 0.243, 95% CI 0.061-0.966, P = 0.045) was a protective factor. Active malignant tumor (OR 10.257, 95% CI 1.883-55.870, P = 0.007), trauma (OR 9.766, 95% CI 1.193-79.948, P = 0.034), and an IMPROVE score ≥ 7 (OR 5.279, 95% CI 1.146-24.321, P = 0.033) were all independent risk factors for bleeding.
Early low-dose anticoagulation can reduce the risk of thrombus propagation in critically ill patients with IDDVT without increasing bleeding risk, but caution should be exercised in those with active malignant tumor, trauma or an IMPROVE score ≥ 7, given their inherently high bleeding risk.
危重症患者孤立性远端深静脉血栓形成(IDDVT)的抗凝治疗仍存在争议。我们研究的目的是评估抗凝治疗是否能使患有IDDVT的危重症患者获益。
我们纳入了2022年6月至2023年6月期间经超声诊断为IDDVT的危重症患者,并将他们回顾性地分为抗凝组和非抗凝组。主要结局是血栓扩展,定义为肺栓塞(PE)和近端深静脉血栓形成(PDVT)的复合结局。次要结局包括PE、PDVT、血栓溶解、大出血、临床相关非大出血和全因死亡率。随访期从IDDVT诊断之日至出院/死亡时间。在倾向评分匹配(PSM)后,比较结局的发生率,并分析血栓扩展/出血的危险因素。
共纳入261例患者进行分析,非抗凝组115例,抗凝组146例。PSM后,53对患者匹配良好。抗凝组血栓扩展的发生率显著低于非抗凝组(5.7%对18.9%,P = 0.038)。然而,两组次要结局的发生率无统计学差异。亚组分析显示,超过70%的患者接受低剂量而非标准剂量的抗凝治疗,尤其是那些患有凝血病和深静脉置管的患者,两个亚组在任何结局方面均未观察到显著差异。最后,手术(OR 3.959,95%CI 1.101 - 14.233,P = 0.035)是血栓扩展的独立危险因素,而早期抗凝(OR 0.243,95%CI 0.061 - 0.966,P = 0.045)是保护因素。活动性恶性肿瘤(OR 10.257,95%CI 1.883 - 55.870,P = 0.007)、创伤(OR 9.766,95%CI 1.193 - 79.948,P = 0.034)和IMPROVE评分≥7(OR 5.279,95%CI 1.146 - 24.321,P = 0.033)均为出血的独立危险因素。
早期低剂量抗凝可降低患有IDDVT的危重症患者的血栓扩展风险,且不增加出血风险,但对于患有活动性恶性肿瘤、创伤或IMPROVE评分≥7的患者应谨慎使用,因为他们本身出血风险较高。