A pilot study of central venous catheter survival in cancer patients using low-molecular-weight heparin (dalteparin) and warfarin without catheter removal for the treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (The Catheter Study)

[Translation into French and republication of: "Central venous catheter associated upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients: Diagnosis and therapeutic management"]

Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a relatively frequent and potentially fatal complication arising in patients with cancer who require a central catheter placement for intravenous treatment. In everyday practice, CRT remains a challenge for management; despite its frequency and its negative clinical impact, few data are available concerning diagnosis and treatment of CRT. In particular, no diagnostic studies or clinical trials have been published that included exclusively patients with cancer and a central venous catheter (CVC). For this reason, many questions regarding optimal management of CRT remain unanswered. Due to the paucity of high-grade evidence regarding CRT in cancer patients, guidelines are derived from upper extremity DVT studies for diagnosis, and from those for lower limb DVT for treatment. This article addresses the issues of diagnosis and management of CRT through a review of the available literature and makes a number of proposals based on the available evidence. In symptomatic patients, venous ultrasound is the most appropriate choice for first-line diagnostic imaging of CRT because it is noninvasive, and its diagnostic performance is high (which is not the case in asymptomatic patients). In the absence of direct comparative clinical trials, we suggest treating patients with CRT with a therapeutic dose of either a LMWH or a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor, with or without a loading dose. These anticoagulants should be given for a total of at least 3 months, including at least 1 month after catheter removal following initiation of therapy.

Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism-Diagnostic and Therapeutic Considerations: An Update Based on the Revised AWMF S2k Guideline

Patients with cancer are prone to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE) with negative impact on quality of life, morbidity, and mortality. Treatment of established VTE is often complex in patients with cancer. Treatment of cancer-associated VTE (CAT) basically comprises initial and maintenance treatment, for 3 to 6 months, secondary preventions, and treatment in special situations. Therapeutic anticoagulation is the treatment of choice in CAT. In addition to the efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) that had been recommended for decades, direct oral anti-factor Xa inhibitors, a subgroup of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), demonstrated their advantages along with the accompanying concerns in several randomized controlled treatment trials of CAT. The latest guidelines, such as the German AWMF-S2k Guideline "Diagnostics and Therapy of Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism," agree with each other on most aspects with respect to the treatment of CAT. Encompassing recent clinical studies, and meta-analyses, as well as the focus on some special management aspects of CAT, the objective of this review is to present a current overview and recommendations for the treatment of CAT.

Management of catheter-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer commonly require a central venous catheter, which is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Despite the frequent occurrence, the optimal anticoagulation management and outcomes for patients with cancer and catheter-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the rates of recurrent VTE and bleeding in patients with cancer and catheter-related upper extremity DVT.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and CENTRAL from inception to June 2, 2023. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent VTE, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding. The incidence rates (with 95% CI) of outcomes were pooled using random effects model.

RESULTS

We included 29 studies (N = 2,836), among which 5 were prospective. The duration of follow-up and anticoagulation varied considerably. The main long-term anticoagulant used was low molecular weight heparin, followed by direct oral anticoagulants. The pooled 3-month recurrent VTE rate from 14 studies (N = 1,128) was 0.56% (95% CI, 0.10%-3.01%; I2 = 0%). The pooled 3-month major bleeding rate from 10 studies (N = 834) was 2.34% (95% CI, 1.14%-4.76%; I2 = 0%). We were unable to pool event rates beyond 3 months, given high heterogeneity. All studies had serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated a relatively low rate of recurrent VTE and moderate rate of major bleeding events within the first 3 months in patients with cancer and catheter-related upper extremity DVT. However, there was significant heterogeneity in the management and reporting after 3 months.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome, recurrent thromboembolism, and bleeding after upper extremity vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Data on complications after upper extremity vein thrombosis (UEVT) are limited and heterogeneous.

METHODS

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the pooled proportions of venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, bleeding, and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients with UEVT. A systematic literature review was conducted of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from January 2000 to April 2023 in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. All studies included patients with UEVT and were published in English. Meta-analyses of VTE recurrence, bleeding, and of PTS after UEVT were performed to compute pooled estimates and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses of cancer-associated UEVT and catheter-associated venous thrombosis were conducted. Patients with Paget-Schroetter syndrome or effort thrombosis were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 55 studies with 15,694 patients were included. The pooled proportions for VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and PTS were 4.8% (95% CI, 3.8%-6.2%), 3.0% (95% CI, 2.2%-4.0%), and 23.8% (95% CI, 17.0%-32.3%), respectively. The pooled proportion of VTE recurrence was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.6%) for patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), 1.7% (95% CI, 0.8%-3.7%) for patients treated with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.5%-11.8%) for vitamin K antagonists (VKAs; P = .36). The pooled proportion was 6.3% (95% CI, 4.3%-9.1%) for cancer patients compared with 3.1% (95% CI, 2.1%-4.6%) for patients without cancer (P = .01). The pooled proportion of major bleeding for patients treated with DOACs, LMWH, and VKAs, was 2.1% (95% CI, 0.9%-5.1%), 3.2% (95% CI, 1.4%-7.2%), and 3.4% (95% CI, 1.4%-8.4%), respectively (P = .72). The pooled proportion of PTS for patients treated with DOACs, LMWH, and VKAs was 11.8% (95% CI, 6.5%-20.6%), 27.9% (95% CI, 20.9%-36.2%), and 24.5% (95% CI, 17.6%-33.1%), respectively (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study suggest that UEVT is associated with significant rates of PTS and VTE recurrence. Treatment with DOACs might be associated with lower PTS rates than treatment with other anticoagulants.

Central venous catheter associated upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients: Diagnosis and therapeutic management

Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a relatively frequent and potentially fatal complication arising in patients with cancer who require a central catheter placement for intravenous treatment. In everyday practice, CRT remains a challenge for management; despite its frequency and its negative clinical impact, few data are available concerning diagnosis and treatment of CRT. In particular, no diagnostic studies or clinical trials have been published that included exclusively patients with cancer and a central venous catheter (CVC). For this reason, many questions regarding optimal management of CRT remain unanswered. Due to the paucity of high-grade evidence regarding CRT in cancer patients, guidelines are derived from upper extremity DVT studies for diagnosis, and from those for lower limb DVT for treatment. This article addresses the issues of diagnosis and management of CRT through a review of the available literature and makes a number of proposals based on the available evidence. In symptomatic patients, venous ultrasound is the most appropriate choice for first-line diagnostic imaging of CRT because it is noninvasive, and its diagnostic performance is high (which is not the case in asymptomatic patients). In the absence of direct comparative clinical trials, we suggest treating patients with CRT with a therapeutic dose of either a LMWH or a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor, with or without a loading dose. These anticoagulants should be given for a total of at least three months, including at least one month after catheter removal following initiation of therapy.

Outcome of antithrombotic therapy in cancer patients with catheter-related thrombosis: a systematic review

Introduction

The guidelines' recommendations for anticoagulation in cancer patients with catheter-related thrombosis are unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to assess anticoagulation management in cancer patients with catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) based on previously published studies.

Methods

As of June 10, 2023,we searched databases including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane and included 11 observational studies that met the criteria. We evaluated 770 adults with active cancer and objectively confirmed patients with CRT who were using drugs including warfarin, LMWH, and new oral anticoagulants as antithrombotic therapy.

Results

We extracted outcome data, including thrombosis recurrence, catheter dysfunction, major bleeding, and death, and performed a meta-analysis.

Discussion

In this study we found that the risk of VTE recurrence was higher with rivaroxaban, the risk of bleeding and death appeared to be greater with warfarin, and although the risk of catheter dysfunction due to LMWH is a concern, it is still a more reasonable option for cancer patients with catheter-related thrombosis.

Systematic Review Registration

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier (CRD42022367979).

French guidelines for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism - 2023 update

BACKGROUND

In recent years, knowledge about cancer associated thrombosis has evolved considerably.

METHODS

Practical guidelines were drafted on the initiative of the INNOVTE FCRIN Network, led by the French Speaking Society of Respiratory Diseases (SPLF), by a coordinating group, a writing group, and a review group, with the involvement of different scientific societies practicing in various settings. The method followed the "Clinical Practice Guidelines" process of the French National Authority for Health (HAS).

RESULTS

After a literature review, guidelines were formulated, improved, and then validated by the working groups. These guidelines addressed multiple aspects of the disease and management from the data of available clinical trials and observational studies : epidemiology, initial treatment, treatment duration, extended treatment, recurrent thrombosis, central venous catheter thrombosis, incidental thrombosis, treatment in case of thrombocytopenia.

CONCLUSION

These evidence-based guidelines are intended to guide the practical management of patients with cancer associated thrombosis.

Unmet clinical needs in the prevention and treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis, is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Based on accumulating evidence, the prophylaxis and treatment of cancer-associated VTE have been changed over the years. Recently, the introduction in clinical practice of the direct oral anticoagulants has radically changed the management of cancer-associated VTE for their easier use and non-inferior efficacy-safety profile compared to low-molecular-weight heparins. However, the heterogeneity of the cancer population in terms of site, type and stage of the malignancy, the presence of comorbidities, and the variability in cancer treatment and prognosis represent major challenges in the management of VTE in patients with cancer. In the present review, we will discuss clinical questions that represent unsolved issues in the setting of cancer-associated VTE and provide an overview on recent evidence on this topic: primary prophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and in cancer surgical patients, need of long-term anticoagulation in cancer patients, treatment of VTE in cancer patients at increased bleeding risk and in special categories such as incidental VTE, splanchnic vein thrombosis or catheter-related thrombosis.

Single-center experience with catheter-directed thrombolysis and balloon angioplasty for acute upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis: a case series study

BACKGROUND

Effective treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) is crucial to prevent further complications. Various treatments, including percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (PMT), catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), decompression surgery, and venoplasty are suggested for UEDVT. However, no prospective study has yet favored any of these treatments. This study presents a review of our experience with CDT followed by balloon venoplasty in patients with acute primary UEDVT.

METHODS

We enrolled all patients diagnosed with acute UEDVT from January 2020 to June 2021. Subjects with UEDVT due to secondary causes like malignancies, indwelling catheters, or leads were excluded. CDT was performed through brachial vein access, using a perfusion catheter, and rt-PA administration. Balloon venoplasty was performed if the treated segment had remaining stenosis after CDT. Patients were followed up at the vein clinic for any signs and symptoms in the upper extremity and lifestyle changes. Follow-up ultrasonography was done 12 months after discharge.

RESULTS

Twelve patients with a mean age of 41.08 ± 14.0 years were included in the study. The mean duration of CDT was 25.00 ± 10.56 h. After CDT, all patients had remaining occlusions, with seven having more than 50% remaining stenosis. However, after balloon venoplasty, no patient had significant (more than 50%) stenosis. There was no serious complication after both procedures. Patients were followed up for a mean duration of twelve months after their admission, with a mean time of maintenance anticoagulation was 10.73 ± 5.77 months. Only one patient had recurrent symptoms in his target limb which required a decompression surgery, while the rest were free of symptoms in their treated extremity. No subject developed pulmonary emboli (PE) during admission or the follow-up period. There was no evidence of hospital readmission for any reason. Upper extremity color-doppler sonography of the patients at twelve months after their procedure showed normal venous flow without any significant stenosis in 8 (66.7%), and partially normal flow with patent target vein in 4 (33.3%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CDT followed by balloon venoplasty may be an effective treatment for selected patients with acute primary UEDVT, providing desirable long-term results and potentially avoiding the need for decompression surgery in the short or long term.

Right heart thrombus in transit and peripherally inserted central catheters

Right heart thrombus in transit or "free-floating right heart thrombus" is defined as thrombus(i) arising from the deep veins that embolises to the right atrium or right ventricle before reaching the pulmonary vasculature. It is almost always associated with pulmonary thromboembolism and is a medical emergency with reported mortality rates of over 40%. We present two cases of right heart thrombus in transit with pulmonary thromboembolism resulting from venous thrombosis associated with peripherally inserted central catheters that were managed with different approaches. The cases highlight that clinicians should have a low threshold to utilise imaging modalities such as computerised tomography and transthoracic echocardiography when there is an untoward change in physiological parameters among patients with peripherally inserted central catheters, particularly those with risk factors for peripherally inserted central catheter associated venous thrombosis. Furthermore, procedural optimisation surrounding peripherally inserted central catheters, such as insertion technique and choice of lumen size, is underscored.

Venous thromboembolism in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A narrative review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and its treatment has significant effects on morbidity and non-relapse mortality. There is a complex interplay on balancing the risk for thrombosis and bleeding in these patients, making treatment decisions particularly challenging. Despite this, there are currently no validated risk assessment models or guidelines to aid clinical decision making on thromboprophylaxis and VTE treatment in this population of patients. Herein, we review the many risk factors for VTE in HSCT patients, categorized into patient, disease, catheter, treatment, laboratory, and transplant-related variables. This review also discusses current thromboprophylaxis and VTE management strategies in HSCT patients, with scope into the development of risk assessment models that allow for identification of high-risk subgroups who may benefit from targeted intervention.

Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for the treatment of PICC-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration and choice of anticoagulant for the treatment of Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC)-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) in cancer patients are still undetermined.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for the treatment of PICC-related UEDVT in cancer patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study including consecutive cancer patients for the management of acute symptomatic PICC-related UEDVT. The efficacy outcome of the study was the 180-day recurrence of any venous thromboembolism (VTE), while the safety outcome was the 180-day incidence of all bleeding events. The Kaplan‒Meier method was used to estimate the overall incidence. Hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained with a Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the risk of the outcome events.

RESULTS

A total of 217 patients were included in the final analysis with a median age of 56 years old, 41.5% of whom had metastases. After the initial 3-5 days of nadroparin, patients received sequential anticoagulation, either with nadroparin (118 patients) or with rivaroxaban (99 patients). Four patients with recurrent VTE were observed (nadroparin, n = 2; rivaroxaban, n = 2). The 180-day cumulative VTE recurrence rates were 1.7% and 2.0% (p = 0.777) in patients receiving nadroparin and rivaroxaban, respectively. The overall bleeding rate at 180 days was 8.8%. Although no major bleeding events were observed, nineteen patients with clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB) were observed. The 180-day cumulative rate of CRNMB was 5.1% for nadroparin and 13.1% for rivaroxaban (HR = 3.303, 95% CI 1.149-9.497, p = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

Our study supported the efficacy of rivaroxaban for treating PICC-related UEDVT in cancer patients. However, data on anticoagulation therapy for PICC-related UEDVT presented with a low risk of VTE recurrence and a relatively high risk of CRNMB bleeding events. Considering the risk-benefit ratio, further well-designed trials are required to optimize the drug selection and duration for the treatment of PICC-related UEDVT in cancer patients.

The 5 most frequently asked questions about factor Xa inhibitors

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are commonly used oral factor Xa inhibitors in recent years. However, in some special clinical situations, the appropriate use of these anticoagulants may be of concern. In this article, we address the 5 commonly asked questions regarding their use for the treatment of venous thromboembolism, including in the setting of obesity, renal impairment, gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy, catheter-related thrombosis, and drug-drug interactions. Data on the use of DOACs in the presence of significant obesity or renal failure are mainly observational. Some DOACs are shown to have an increased risk of bleeding in patients with unresected luminal GI malignancy but not others, so selection of appropriate patients is the key. Furthermore, literature on the use of DOACs for catheter-related thrombosis or when drug-drug interactions are of concern is limited, and more research is welcome.

Characteristics and predictors of venous thrombosis recurrence in patients with cancer and catheter-related thrombosis

Background

Central venous catheters raise the risk of catheter‐related thrombosis (CRT) in patients with cancer, typically affecting the upper extremity. Management of CRT involves catheter removal and anticoagulation. However, robust evidence is lacking on the optimal timing of anticoagulation relative to catheter removal.

Objectives

Our goal is to provide a better understanding of the factors that increase the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in these patients.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a retrospective chart review of all consecutive patients with cancer in our hospital affected by CRT between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017. We measured recurrence of VTE as thrombosis in any vascular bed or pulmonary embolism, for up to 2 years after diagnosis. Logistic and competing risk regression analyses were used to determine the association between different clinical factors and any VTE recurrence in patients with cancer and CRT.

Results

Of the 257 individuals meeting the inclusion criteria, 80.2% had their catheter removed; of these, 50.5% did not receive anticoagulation before the removal. Patients who did not receive anticoagulation before the removal had increased 3‐month and 1‐year risks of recurrent VTE (odds ratio, 5.07 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53–23.18]; and hazard ratio, 3.47 [95% CI, 1.34–9.01]), respectively.

Conclusions

Our study supports the use of anticoagulants before catheter removal in patients with CRT. Randomized clinical trials are recommended to establish stronger evidence pertaining to the long‐term risk of VTE recurrence and the effect of catheter reinsertion.

Anticoagulant treatment for upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Data on anticoagulant treatment for upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) are largely derived from studies on usual site venous thromboembolism (VTE).

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy for UEDVT.

PATIENTS/METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted for studies including patients with UEDVT. Primary outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included clinically-relevant non-major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Summary estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by random-effect meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1473 patients from 11 prospective and nine retrospective studies were included. Sixty percent of patients had an indwelling catheter and 56.1% had cancer. Anticoagulant treatment consisted of direct oral anticoagulants, low molecular weight heparin followed by vitamin K antagonists, and low molecular weight heparin alone in 45.1%, 35.0%, and 19.9% of patients, respectively. During a median follow-up of 13 months, recurrent VTE occurred in 3% of patients (95% CI: 2-4; 21/1334 patients), major bleeding in 3% (95% CI: 2%-5%; 29/1235 patients), clinically-relevant non-major bleeding in 4% (95% CI: 3-6; 40/1075 patients), and all-cause mortality in 9% (95% CI: 5-15; 108/1084 patients). Rates of these outcomes were not significantly different between patients with or without cancer, patients with or without an indwelling catheter, and among those receiving different anticoagulant treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with UEDVT, anticoagulant treatment is associated with a low risk of recurrent VTE and a nonnegligible risk of major bleeding.

Treatment of Atypical Clots

The term unusual site thrombosis refers to the occurrence of venous thromboembolism outside of the lower limbs and the pulmonary arteries. Unusual site thrombosis can virtually affect any venous segment, with the most common and/or clinically relevant sites including the upper limbs veins, the retinal veins, the splanchnic veins and the cerebral veins. Clinical features are obviously heterogeneous, while many predisposing factors are common, though with different prevalence among the various disorders. Antithrombotic therapy is prescribed to most patients, but the type, intensity, and duration of treatment vary both within and among patient groups. Increasing evidence is supporting the use of the direct oral anticoagulants in patients with upper limb deep vein thrombosis, cerebral vein thrombosis, and with splanchnic vein thrombosis. This article will review available evidence on the treatment of venous thrombosis occurring in unusual sites.

Treatment Algorithm in Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Updated Canadian Expert Consensus

Patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) are at high risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding complications. Risks vary significantly between individuals based on cancer status, treatment, and other characteristics. To facilitate the evidence-based management of anticoagulant therapy in this patient population, a committee of 11 Canadian clinical experts updated a consensus-based algorithm for the acute and extended treatment of symptomatic and incidental CAT that was developed in 2018. Following a systematic review of the literature, updates to the algorithm were discussed during an online teleconference, and the algorithm was subsequently refined based on feedback from committee members. Clinicians using this treatment algorithm should consider bleeding risk, type of cancer, and drug-drug interactions, as well as patient and clinician preferences, in tailoring anticoagulation for patients with CAT. Anticoagulant therapy should be adapted as the patient's cancer status and management change over time.

Venous thromboembolism associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer: From pathophysiology to thromboprophylaxis, areas for future studies

Symptomatic catheter related thrombosis (CRT) occurs in 4%-8% of cancer patients. The mean incidence of CRT, detected either by echography or Doppler ranges between 12 and 14% with a high negative predictive value of about 95%, allowing the subsequent occurrence of CRT (symptomatic and asymptomatic) to be safely excluded. Despite its frequency and its medico-economic consequences, no thromboprophylaxis has been validated to date. In most patients, CRT occurs immediately after catheter insertion, most often within the first week and almost all within the first month after insertion. Meta analyses show a reduction of asymptomatic and symptomatic CRT incidence by about 55%-60% using either vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins without an increased risk of major bleeding. This pharmacological prophylaxis is only effective when started before the central venous catheter insertion at prophylactic doses and thereafter continued at subtherapeutic doses. Since no population at high risk of CRT has been identified, this review focuses on pathophysiology, epidemiology and clinical supportive data that could lead to a new CRT prophylaxis strategy.

Central catheter-associated deep vein thrombosis in cancer: clinical course, prophylaxis, treatment

The adequate handling of central venous catheters is a key element in the management of patients with cancer. Catheter-associated deep vein thrombosis is frequently observed in patients with malignant diseases; however, despite being a common complication among these patients, objective information concerning its epidemiology, clinical course, prophylaxis and treatment strategies is very limited. The reported incidence of catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is highly variable, depending on symptomatic events, or if patients are screened for asymptomatic thrombosis. Several factors have been identified as potential predisposing factors for CRT, both technical and pathological aspects. The anticoagulant of choice is still unclear; while low-molecular-weight heparin is most commonly used, recent studies assessing the role of direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of CRT show promise as an alternative, but the evidence remains insufficient and the decision must be made on a case-by-case basis.

Management of Myeloma Manifestations and Complications: The Cornerstone of Supportive Care: Recommendation of the Canadian Myeloma Research Group (formerly Myeloma Canada Research Network) Consensus Guideline Consortium

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematological cancer associated with significant symptomatic burden. Bone disease, renal insufficiency, cytopenias, infection, and peripheral neuropathy, among other disease manifestations and complications, impair patients' quality of life. The Canadian Myeloma Research Group Consensus Guideline Consortium, formerly Myeloma Canada Research Network Consensus Guideline Consortium, proposes national consensus recommendations for the management of MM-related manifestations and complications. To address the needs of Canadian physicians and people living with MM across the country, this document focuses on the improvement and maintenance of patient care by clarifying best-practice approaches for the prevention, detection and management of disease manifestations and complications. The Canadian Myeloma Research Group Consensus Guideline Consortium will periodically review the recommendations herein and update as necessary.

Current Recommendations for the Management of Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a major cause of death in oncological patients. The mechanisms of thrombogenesis in cancer patients are not fully established, and it seems to be multifactorial in origin. Also, several risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are present in these patients such as tumor site, stage, histology of cancer, chemotherapy, surgery, and immobilization. Anticoagulant treatment in CAT is challenging because of high bleeding risk during treatment and recurrence of VTE. Current major guidelines recommend low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) for early and long-term treatment of VTE in cancer patients. In the past years, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended as potential treatment option for VTE and have recently been proposed as a new option for treating CAT. This manuscript will give a short overview of risk factors involved in the development of CAT and a summary on the recent recommendations and guidelines for treatment of VTE in patients with malignancies, discussing also some special clinical situations (e.g. renal impairment, catheter-related thrombosis, and thrombocytopenia).

Management of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: an updated review of the literature

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) represents about 5-10% of all cases of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) with a steadily increasing incidence mostly due to the high prevalence of cancer and frequent use of intravascular devices such as central venous catheters and pacemaker. In primary UEDVT, the venous outflow obstruction and subsequent thrombosis are related to congenital or acquired anatomical abnormalities, whereas secondary UEDVT is often associated with malignancy or indwelling lines. A considerable proportion of patients with UEDVT develops serious complications such as recurrent thrombosis, post-thrombotic syndrome, and pulmonary embolism, therefore timely diagnosis and adequate treatment are of crucial importance. Despite sharing many similarities with lower extremity DVT, UEDVT has distinctive features requiring specific diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. The present review discusses the latest evidence on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of UEDVT, and provides management indications which may help guide clinical decision making.

Treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: The dark side of the moon

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with cancer. The risk of emergent VTE is four- to seven-fold higher in cancer patients compared to non-cancer patients. Although the therapeutic armamentarium for cancer-associated VTE has been recently implemented, anticoagulant treatment remains challenging because of the increased risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding. Several international societies and expert panels released clinical practice guidelines on VTE treatment which are mostly focused on the general cancer population. Nevertheless, recommendations for the management of VTE in patients with peculiar clinical presentations are inconsistent and remain elusive due to the lack of pertinent evidence. The challenging clinical scenarios include, among others, patients with thrombocytopenia, renal impairment, gastrointestinal cancer, primary or metastatic brain cancer, distal thrombosis of the lower extremities, catheter-related VTE, splanchnic thrombosis, incidental VTE, extreme body weight, recurrent VTE during treatment, as well as the optimal duration of anticoagulant treatment in patients with active disease who have received 3 to 6 months of anticoagulation. Herein, we present a critical overview on VTE management in these challenging clinical settings, discuss potential approaches, and include some calls to action for future clinical research.

A review of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

This review aims to describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, presentation, complications, evaluation/diagnosis, and treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT). Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) accounts for 6% of cases of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). It can lead to swelling and discomfort in that extremity and can be complicated by pulmonary embolism, post-thrombotic syndrome, and recurrence of DVT. Evaluation can begin with a dichotomized Constans score and fibrin degradation product testing. Diagnosis is typically made with compression ultrasound. Anticoagulation is the mainstay of therapy. Primary UEDVT is known as Paget Schroetter Syndrome (PSS) which occurs due to venous thoracic outlet syndrome (vTOS). Anticoagulation, thrombolysis, and decompression of the venous thoracic outlet are used for treatment but the optimal strategy remains to be elucidated. Secondary UEDVT are most commonly caused by indwelling catheters and malignancy. There is an ongoing realization that UEDVT are more than simply 'leg clots in the arm.' Given the increasing incidence, research needs to be done to further our understanding of this disease state, its evaluation, and its treatment.

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Patients with cancer and VTE are at a markedly increased risk for morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The guideline development process was supported by updated or new systematic evidence reviews. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations address mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, those undergoing a surgical procedure, and ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. The recommendations also address the use of anticoagulation for the initial, short-term, and long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include not using thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy at low risk of VTE and to use low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for initial treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Conditional recommendations include using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, LMWH or fondaparinux for surgical patients with cancer, LMWH or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving systemic therapy at high risk of VTE and LMWH or DOAC for initial treatment of VTE, DOAC for the short-term treatment of VTE, and LMWH or DOAC for the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

Approach to Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Challenging Situations and Knowledge Gaps

Malignancy is a significant risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE). It is estimated that up to 20% of patients with cancer may develop VTE at some time in their cancer journey. Cancer-associated VTE can lead to hospitalizations, morbidity, delayed cancer treatment, and mortality. The optimal prevention and management of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is of utmost importance. Direct oral anticoagulants have been recommended as first-line therapy for VTE treatment in the general population and their efficacy has recently been demonstrated in the cancer population, leading to increased use. However, patients with cancer have unique challenges and comorbidities that can lead to increased risks and concerns with anticoagulation. Herein we will discuss commonly encountered challenges in patients with CAT, review available literature, and provide practice suggestions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article aims to specifically address cancer-associated thrombosis issues for which there is limited or absent evidence to guide best practice, for circumstances that pose unique challenges for clinicians, and for directions when the literature is conflicting. It reviews pertinent data for each selected topic and provides guidance for patient management based on the best available evidence and experiences from the panel.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) accounts for 5% of all deep vein thromboses (DVTs). UEDVT may be complicated by post thrombotic syndrome and pulmonary embolism, and early recognition and prompt start of anticoagulant treatment are key. Primary UEDVT, also known as Paget-von Schrötter syndrome, is associated with repeated or sudden physical activity of the upper arm and venous outflow obstruction due to anatomical variations. Secondary UEDVT is often associated with malignancy or use of intravenous devices, such as central venous catheters or pacemaker leads. Although the diagnosis and treatment of UEDVT have many similarities with DVT of the lower extremities, knowledge of specific aspects regarding UEDVT is important to guide optimal management. In this review, we will discuss the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of UEDVT based on the current literature.

Midterm outcomes in patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Outcomes and the necessity for anticoagulation in patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UE DVT) are unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of UE DVT, the outcomes of patients stratified by anticoagulation treatment, and which factors were significantly associated with mortality.

METHODS

This study was a single-center, retrospective review of all patients undergoing UE venous duplex imaging in 2016. Information on patients' demographics, relevant comorbidities, use of anticoagulation at the time of diagnosis, characteristics of the UE DVT, treatment regimen(s), and outcomes was collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive and univariate statistics; multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify which of the aforementioned covariates are significantly associated with mortality rates at 30 days and 6 months, respectively, at a 95% confidence level.

RESULTS

Of the 911 patients undergoing UE venous duplex imaging, 182 (20.0%) were positive for UE DVT. Within the first 30 days, 30 patients (16.5%) died, 13 (7.1%) had pulmonary emboli, 42 (23.1%) had either pulmonary emboli or died, and 3 (1.6%) had ischemic strokes. Within the first 6 months, 50 patients (27.5%) died. The mortality rate at 30 days was found to be significantly increased in patients who were older (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; P < .01), had high-risk contraindications to anticoagulation (OR, 5.14; P < .01), were on dialysis (OR, 3.03; P = .04), had centrally located UE DVTs (OR, 2.72; P < .05), and had a stroke (OR, 20.34; P = .03). Mortality was significantly decreased in patients who were treated with anticoagulation (OR, 0.16; P < .05). At 6 months, however, age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; P < .001), male sex (HR, 2.16; P = .02), dialysis (HR, 2.90; P = .01), high-risk contraindications to anticoagulation (HR, 2.67; P = .02), UE DVTs in both central and peripheral veins (HR, 4.55; P = .03), and ischemic stroke in the first 30 days (HR, 71.63; P < .001) were associated with significant increases in mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that mortality rates among patients with UE DVT are relatively high and that treatment with anticoagulation is associated with a decrease in mortality at 30 days. Mortality was also associated with multiple comorbid conditions and demographics and not necessarily venous thromboembolism.

SEOM clinical guideline of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and cancer (2019)

In 2011, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) first published a clinical guideline of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and cancer. This guideline was updated in 2014, and since then, multiple studies and clinical trials have changed the landscape of the treatment and prophylaxis of VTE in cancer patients. To incorporate the most recent evidence, including data from direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) randomized clinical trials, SEOM presents a new update of the guideline.

2018 Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy

A panel of experts was convened by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) to update the 2004 clinical practice guideline on outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) [1]. This guideline is intended to provide insight for healthcare professionals who prescribe and oversee the provision of OPAT. It considers various patient features, infusion catheter issues, monitoring questions, and antimicrobial stewardship concerns. It does not offer recommendations on the treatment of specific infections. The reader is referred to disease- or organism-specific guidelines for such support.

Variability in the management of line-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis

Objectives:

Central-venous devices are risk-factors for upper extremity deep vein thrombosis. We surveyed physicians to identify practice-patterns and adherence to American College of Chest Physicians guidelines.

Methods:

The 13-question survey obtained physician-demographics and treatment-choices. Respondents were grouped into surgical and medical specialists. Data were reported as ratios and percentages, and compared using Fisher’s exact test.

Results:

We received 143 responses from physicians; 65% treated one-to-two new cases/month. Most physicians (69.2%) used anticoagulation; 36.4% retained the catheter and 32.9% removed it. Medical-specialists retained catheters more often than surgeons (p = 0.027). For recurrences, 84% repeated anticoagulation; 50.3% retained the catheter. A majority anticoagulated upper-extremity deep-vein thrombosis in long-term catheters for three months only (55.1%). Direct oral anticoagulants were used frequently (43.6%). Only 10% believed that existing guidelines were appropriate and only 2.8% followed all guidelines.

Conclusion:

There is great variability in treatment-decisions for upper-extremity deep-vein thrombosis. The existing guidelines are considered inadequate and not followed by most physicians.

The efficacy and safety of a catheter removal only strategy for the treatment of PICC line thrombosis versus standard of care anticoagulation: a retrospective review

Peripherally-inserted central catheters (PICCs) are commonly used during hospitalization. Unfortunately, their use can be complicated by catheter-related thrombosis (CRT). Current guidelines recommend 3-6 months of anticoagulation for patients with CRT after catheter removal. This recommendation is based on extrapolation of data on lower extremity thrombosis, as data is lacking regarding the efficacy and safety of more specific management strategies. Many providers feel catheter removal alone is a reasonable treatment option, particularly for patients at risk for bleeding. We performed a retrospective analysis of hospitalized adult patients diagnosed with CRT at our center. We determined rates of progressive thrombosis and bleeding in cohorts of patients who underwent catheter removal vs those who had catheters removed and received anticoagulation. Among 83 total patients, 62 were treated with PICC removal alone, while 21 underwent PICC removal followed by therapeutic anticoagulation. Patients treated with PICC removal alone were more likely to have hematologic malignancy, receive chemotherapy, develop thrombocytopenia, and have brachial vein thrombosis. No patients in the PICC removal plus anticoagulation arm developed progressive thrombosis, while 6.4% of patients treated with catheter removal alone developed a secondary VTE event, including one PE, three DVTs, and five patients (8%) who developed progressive symptoms leading to initiation of anticoagulation. Major bleeding was significantly more common in the PICC removal + anticoagulation arm (28.5% vs. 4.8% p = 0.007). Catheter-removal alone results in significantly reduced major bleeding compared with catheter-removal plus anticoagulation. In select patients, catheter removal alone may be an option for CRT.

Innovative application of an implantable venous access system in the portal vein: technique, results and complications in three dogs

Background

Vascular access port (VAP) systems are widely used in human medicine to provide long-term venous access. However, in veterinary medicine the use of VAP systems is not common practice and publications on their potential applications have been limited. A VAP system was used as part of an experimental study on liver regeneration and implanted in the canine portal vein to create direct access to the portal venous circulation of the liver. The aim of the present study is to describe the surgical technique, its use, and the complications of a VAP system in three research dogs.

Results

The VAP system was successfully used for the intraoperative measurement of portal blood pressure, the administration of cell suspensions, and the collection of portal venous blood samples. Long-term complications consisted of dislocation of the VAP system in one dog (2 months after implantation) and thrombus formation at the catheter tip in two dogs (3 months after implantation). Both complications prevented further use of the VAP but had no adverse clinical implications.

Conclusions

This pilot study suggests that the VAP system is an effective and safe technique to obtain long term access to the portal venous system in dogs. However, complications with port detachment and thrombosis may limit long term use of VAPs in the portal system of dogs.

Apixaban for Routine Management of Upper Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis (ARM-DVT): Methods of a prospective single-arm management study

BACKGROUND

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) constitutes approximately 10% of all deep vein thromboses (DVTs). The incidence of UEDVT is increasing in association with use of peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Treatment for UEDVT is derived largely from evidence for treatment of lower extremity DVT. Limited evidence exists for the use of a direct oral anticoagulant for the treatment of UEDVT.

POPULATION

Sequential patients identified within the Intermountain Healthcare System and University of Utah Healthcare system with symptomatic UEDVT defined as the formation of thrombus within the internal jugular, subclavian, axillary, brachial, ulnar, or radial veins of the arm.

INTERVENTION

Apixaban 10 mg PO twice daily for 7 days followed by apixaban 5 mg twice daily for 11 weeks.

COMPARISON

The historical literature review rate of venous thrombosis reported for recurrent clinically overt objective venous thromboembolism (VTE) and VTE-related death. If the confidence interval for the observed rate excludes the threshold event rate of 4%, we will conclude that treatment with apixaban is noninferior and therefore a clinically valid approach to treat UEDVT.

SAMPLE SIZE

We elected a sample size of 375 patients so that an exact 95% confidence interval would exclude an event rate of VTE in the observation cohort of 4%.

OUTCOME

Ninety-day rate of new or recurrent objectively confirmed symptomatic venous thrombosis and VTE-related death. The primary safety outcome is the composite of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding.

Etiology and Management of Upper-Extremity Catheter-Related Thrombosis in Cancer Patients

Central venous access devices are a critical instrument in the treatment and supportive care delivery for oncology patients. Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a common complication of central venous access devices in oncology patients. Risk factors for CRT include patient-, device-, and treatment-related risk factors. Treatment of CRT is indicated to reduce symptoms, prevent catheter malfunction, prevent recurrent DVT or thromboembolic pulmonary embolism, and minimize the risk of post-thrombotic syndrome. Minimal prospective data exist on the prevention and treatment of catheter-related thromboses in cancer patients. As such recommendations largely are derived from data in the lower-extremity DVT and PE studies in cancer and non-cancer patients. Based on the available literature, primary pharmacologic prophylaxis against CRT is not recommended in cancer patients. Treatment options for CRT include catheter removal, anticoagulation, catheter-directed thrombolysis, or surgical thrombectomy. Current evidence-based guidelines recommend LMWH as the anticoagulant of choice. However, recent data showing efficacy and safety of DOACs in cancer-related VTE may be extrapolated to treatment of CRT in cancer patients. In patients with CRT, catheter removal should be pursued if continued vascular access is no longer needed, the catheter is dysfunctional, a catheter-associated infection is present, or if CRT symptoms do not resolve with anticoagulation alone. Catheter-directed thrombolysis is reserved for rare severe cases of CRT. Herein we discuss the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and general management of CRT in cancer patients.

How I treat cancer-associated venous thromboembolism

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a common complication of cancer and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Several cancer-related risk factors contribute to the development of VTE including cancer type and stage, chemotherapy, surgery, and patient-related factors such as advanced age and immobilization. Patients with cancer frequently undergo diagnostic imaging scans for cancer staging and treatment response evaluation, which is increasing the underlying risk of VTE detection. The management of cancer-associated VTE is challenging. Over the years, important advances have been made and, recently, randomized controlled trials have been published helping clinicians' management of this patient population. In this review, we will discuss common cancer-associated VTE scenarios and critically review available evidence to guide treatment decisions.

Incidence and outcomes of catheter related thrombosis (CRT) in patients with acute leukemia using a platelet-adjusted low molecular weight heparin regimen

Patients with acute leukemia frequently develop catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) despite concurrent thrombocytopenia. The incidence, treatment and outcomes of this complication are poorly documented. We undertook this study to determine the incidence of CRT in patients with acute leukemia and assess the safety and effectiveness of a treatment strategy using a platelet-adjusted low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) dosing protocol. Patients (18 years and older) with newly diagnosed acute leukemia from January 2014 to December 2015 who received central venous catheters were included. The clinical data were reviewed up to 12 months from acute leukemia diagnosis to capture objectively documented CRT events. The outcome events including recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), bleeding events, infectious or mechanical complications, and death were reported up to 3 months from the time of CRT diagnosis. The incidence of CRT among 214 patients was 10.7% (23 patients) in the first 12 months after acute leukemia diagnosis. Among 18 patients who were treated with anticoagulation, 14 (78%) received reduced LMWH dosing due to concurrent thrombocytopenia. There were no recurrent VTE episodes, but 3 patients experienced bleeding events while on anticoagulation. Fifteen patients (83%) completed a minimum of 3 months anticoagulation. Twelve patients (52%) experienced an infectious complication, which was the main reason for catheter removal. Deaths occurred in 2 patients, related to underlying acute leukemia during 3 months period following CRT. Symptomatic CRT is frequent in patients with acute leukemia. Platelet-adjusted LMWH dosing may be effective and well tolerated despite thrombocytopenia.

Treatment algorithm in cancer-associated thrombosis: Canadian expert consensus

Management of anticoagulant therapy for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (vte) in cancer patients is complex because of an increased risk of recurrent vte and major bleeding complications in those patients relative to the general population. Subgroups of patients with cancer also show variation in their risk for recurrent vte and adverse bleeding events. Accordingly, a committee of 10 Canadian clinical experts developed the consensus risk- stratification treatment algorithm presented here to provide guidance on tailoring anticoagulant treatment choices for the acute and extended treatment of symptomatic and incidental vte, to prevent recurrent vte, and to minimize the bleeding risk in patients with cancer. During a 1-day live meeting, a systematic review of the literature was performed, and a draft treatment algorithm was developed. The treatment algorithm was refined through the use of a Web-based platform and a series of online teleconferences. Clinicians using this treatment algorithm should consider the bleeding risk, the type of cancer, and the potential for drug-drug interactions in addition to informed patient preference in determining the most appropriate treatment for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. Anticoagulant therapy should be regularly reassessed as the patient's cancer status and management change over time.