[Surgical therapy of acute and embolizing deep venous thrombosis--indication, technical principle, results]

Post-thrombotic syndrome in children: a systematic review of frequency of occurrence, validity of outcome measures, and prognostic factors

BACKGROUND

Post-thrombotic syndrome is a manifestation of chronic venous insufficiency following deep venous thrombosis. This systematic review was conducted to critically evaluate pediatric evidence on frequency of occurrence, validity of outcome measures, and prognostic indicators of post-thrombotic syndrome.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of original reports revealed 19 eligible studies, totaling 977 patients with upper/lower extremity deep venous thrombosis. Calculated weighted mean frequency of post-thrombotic syndrome was 26% (95% confidence interval: 23-28%) overall, and differed significantly by prospective/non-prospective analysis and use/non-use of a standardized outcome measure.

RESULTS

Standardized post-thrombotic syndrome outcome measures included an adaptation of the Villalta scale, the Clinical-Etiologic-Anatomic-Pathologic classification, and the Manco-Johnson instrument. Data on validity were reported only for the Manco-Johnson instrument. No publications on post-thrombotic syndrome-related quality of life outcomes were identified. Candidate prognostic factors for post-thrombotic syndrome in prospective studies included use/non-use of thrombolysis and plasma levels of factor VIII activity and D-dimer.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that affected children must endure chronic sequelae for many decades, it is imperative that future collaborative pediatric prospective cohort studies and trials assess as key objectives and outcomes the incidence, severity, prognostic indicators, and health impact of post-thrombotic syndrome, using validated measures.

Prothrombin and factor V mutations in women with a history of thrombosis during pregnancy and the puerperium

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality during pregnancy and the puerperium. However, the role of mutations in the prothrombin and factor V genes and other thrombophilic abnormalities as risk factors for thromboembolism in women during pregnancy and the pueperium is not known.

METHODS

In a study of 119 women with a history of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy and the puerperium and 233 age-matched normal women, we measured the activity of antithrombin, protein C, protein S, and lupus anticoagulant. We also performed genetic analyses to detect the G1691A mutation in the factor V gene (factor V Leiden), the G20210A mutation in the prothrombin gene, and the C677T mutation in the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene. Blood samples were obtained at least three months post partum or after the cessation of lactation.

RESULTS

Among the women with a history of venous thromboembolism, the prevalence of factor V Leiden was 43.7 percent, as compared with 7.7 percent among the normal women (relative risk of venous thromboembolism, 9.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 5.1 to 16.9); that of the G20210A prothrombin-gene mutation, 16.9 percent as compared with 1.3 percent (relative risk, 15.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 4.2 to 52.6); and that of both factor V Leiden and the G20210A prothrombin-gene mutation 9.3 percent as compared with 0 (estimated odds ratio, 107). Assuming an overall risk of 1 in 1500 pregnancies, the risk of thrombosis among carriers of factor V Leiden was 0.2 percent, among carriers of the G20210A prothrombin-gene mutation, 0.5 percent, and among carriers of both defects, 4.6 percent, as calculated in a multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The G20210A prothrombin-gene mutation and factor V Leiden individually are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy and the puerperium, and the risk among women with both mutations is disproportionately higher than that among women with only one mutation.

Surgical venous thrombectomy

Rehabilitation of the technique of venous thrombectomy is justified, but, in order for this technique to be effective, it must only be performed in selected cases. In the authors' view it is of the utmost value in young patients when the venous thrombosis occurs accidentally, after traumatism or surgery and when a diagnostic is made without delay.

Venous thrombectomy for iliofemoral vein thrombosis--10-year results of a prospective randomised study

OBJECTIVES

To study if venous thrombectomy prevents late post-thrombotic sequelae, venous obstruction reflux, and improves venous physiology following an acute iliofemoral venous thrombosis.

DESIGN

Prospective randomised controlled study.

MATERIAL

Thirty patients returned for follow-up 10 years after an acute iliofemoral venous thrombosis initially treated with conventional anticoagulation treatment (medical group, n = 17) or with thrombectomy combined with a temporary arteriovenous fistula and anticoagulation (surgical group, n = 13). Clinical assessment, radionuclide angiography, duplex ultrasound and venous physiology tests were performed.

RESULTS

Leg swelling was recorded in 12 (71%) and leg ulcers in three (18%) of the medical patients and in, respectively, six (46%) and one (8%) of the surgical patients. The surgical patients had less severe sequelae (class 0-2). Radionuclide angiography demonstrated that the iliac vein was more commonly occluded following medical (59%) than following surgical (17%) treatment (p < 0.05). Duplex examination demonstrated slightly (n.s.) more reflux in the femoral and popliteal veins in the medical group. Venous physiology (occlusion plethysmography, foot volumetry, and foot vein pressures) did not show any significant differences, although the medical group tended to have a more severe pathology.

CONCLUSION

Venous thrombectomy improves venous patency and possibly reduces venous reflux and post-thrombotic sequelae as compared to anticoagulation treatment.

Late results of iliofemoral venous thrombectomy

PURPOSE

Although anticoagulation therapy for iliofemoral venous thrombosis prevents pulmonary embolism, it is not designed to avoid the postthrombotic syndrome. Mechanical removal of the thrombus in the form of venous thrombectomy should yield better long-term results. The purpose of our study was to analyze the clinical outcome and venous valvular function of limbs 5 to 13 years after iliofemoral venous thrombectomy.

METHODS

Seventy-seven lower extremities underwent venous thrombectomy for acute iliofemoral venous thrombosis and were monitored for a mean follow-up of 8 1/2 years (range, 5 to 13 years). Patency of the iliofemoral venous system, competence of the femoral popliteal valves, and clinical signs and symptoms of chronic venous insufficiency were evaluated in each case.

RESULTS

Subsequent to early perioperative failure, patency remained stable over time at 84%. Valvular competence was preserved in 80% at 5 years; however, it decreased to 56% at 10 years. It is important that more than 90% of the limbs had no symptoms or mild symptoms of chronic venous insufficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Venous thrombectomy should be considered for primary treatment in selected cases of early iliofemoral venous thrombosis.

Complications following caval interruption

Caval interruption is widely regarded as the treatment of choice for the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (PE). The safety, ease of insertion and "convenience" of the devices are the main arguments for filter placement. Today many filters are placed for prophylactic reasons, sometimes without an established diagnosis of pulmonary embolism or underlying deep venous thrombosis. Early and late complications have been published but the rate is reported to be low, although only limited numbers of patients have been followed. In an 18-year period 11 patients with problems following caval interruption were treated, 10 with acute complications, one with chronic caval occlusion. Six were treated conservatively, five underwent venous thrombectomy and a.v.-fistula. The device was removed in four. During the same period only three permanent filters were placed in our hospital (two with complications). Caval interruption is useful in selected high-risk patients and is the least invasive but not necessarily the best treatment. Provided stringent criteria are applied, the early and late complications can be accepted in order to prevent sudden death in patients with threatening massive PE. Extended or more liberal indications for caval interruption are neither necessary nor justified.