Hybrid venous recanalization and cardiac implantable electronic device lead revision procedures: A single-center retrospective analysis of 38 patients

Antithrombotic Therapy After Venous Interventions: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Interventions for thrombotic and nonthrombotic venous disorders have increased with technical advances and more trained venous specialists. Antithrombotic therapy is essential to clinical and procedural success; however, post-procedural therapeutic regimens exhibit significant heterogeneity due to limited prospective randomized data as well as incomplete mechanistic understanding of the critical factors driving long-term patency. Post-interventional antithrombotic therapy for thrombotic venous disorders should adhere to existing venous thromboembolism management guidelines, which include 3-6 months of therapeutic anticoagulation at minimum and consideration of extended therapy in patients with higher risk of thrombosis due to procedural or patient factors. The additive benefit of antiplatelet agents in the acute and intermediate period is unknown, having shown improved long-term stent patency in some retrospective studies. Dual and/or triple agent therapy should be limited based on individual risks of thrombosis and bleeding. The treatment of non-thrombotic disorders is more heterogeneous, though patients with limited flow, extensive stent material, or underlying prothrombotic states such as malignancy or chronic inflammation may benefit from single- or multi-agent antithrombotic therapy. However, the agent, dose, and duration of therapy remain indeterminate. Future prospective studies are warranted to improve patient risk stratification and standardize post-procedural antithrombotic therapy in patients receiving venous interventions.

Central Venoplasty in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Objective The aim of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of the central venous angioplasty in patients with central venous occlusion and cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) without lead extraction.

Materials and Methods A retrospective study was used to evaluate the effectiveness of 37 central venous angioplasty procedure for 15 patients with CIED without lead extraction.

Results Technical success was achieved in 97% (n = 36/37) and clinical success was achieved in 89% (33/37) of the procedures. One procedure failed recanalization of chronic total occlusion of the left subclavian vein, and the patient required fistula embolization due to severe arm swelling. Another procedure failed initially to recanalize long-segment occlusion involving the right subclavian vein/brachiocephalic vein and superior vena cava in a patient with a history of Hickman line and left-sided CIED. This was successfully recanalized and angioplastied on a subsequent session. No lead fracture or dislodgment was documented in any procedure. No procedure-related complication was documented within 2 weeks after the angioplasty. Six-month primary patency was achieved in 62% (23/37) of the procedures. Ten patients (66%) required an average of 1.4 reinterventions (range: 1–4 interventions) during the follow-up time with mean time to reintervention of 318 days (5–1,380 days). Two patients required early reinterventions within 10 days due to catheter dysfunction.

Conclusion Findings of this study support the existing evidence on the safety and effectiveness of balloon angioplasty without lead extraction.