VASA. Zeitschrift fur Gefasskrankheiten · 2015
Catheter-directed thrombolysis plus anticoagulation versus anticoagulation alone in the treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis - a meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Du Guo-Cheng, Zhang Mao-Chun, Zhao Ji-Chun
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) plus anticoagulation with anticoagulation alone in patients with lower-extremity proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to October, 2014. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies comparing the clinical outcomes between additional CDT and anticoagulation alone were included. The primary outcomes were postthrombotic syndrome and major bleeding complications. The secondary outcomes included the iliofemoral patency rate, deep venous function, mortality, pulmonary embolism, and recurrent DVT.
RESULTS: Three RCTs and 3 non-randomized studies were included. Compared with standard anticoagulation treatment, additional CDT was associated with a significantly higher rate of complete lysis within 30 days (OR = 91; 95 % CI 19.28 to 429.46), a higher rate of 6-month patency (OR = 5.77; 95 % CI 1.99 to 16.73), a lower rate of postthrombotic syndrome (OR = 0.4; 95 % CI 0.19 to 0.96), and a lower rate of venous obstruction (OR = 0.20; 95 % CI 0.09 to 0.44). More major bleeding episodes occurred in the CDT group (Peto OR 2.0; 95 % CI 1.62 to 2.62). CDT was not found to reduce mortality, pulmonary embolism, or recurrent DVT.
CONCLUSIONS: Additional CDT therapy appeared to be more effective than standard anticoagulation treatment in improving the venous patency and preventing venous obstruction and postthrombotic syndrome. Caution should be taken when performing CDT given the increased risk of major bleeding. However, no evidence supported benefits of CDT in reducing mortality, recurrent DVT, or pulmonary embolism.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to October, 2014. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies comparing the clinical outcomes between additional CDT and anticoagulation alone were included. The primary outcomes were postthrombotic syndrome and major bleeding complications. The secondary outcomes included the iliofemoral patency rate, deep venous function, mortality, pulmonary embolism, and recurrent DVT.
RESULTS: Three RCTs and 3 non-randomized studies were included. Compared with standard anticoagulation treatment, additional CDT was associated with a significantly higher rate of complete lysis within 30 days (OR = 91; 95 % CI 19.28 to 429.46), a higher rate of 6-month patency (OR = 5.77; 95 % CI 1.99 to 16.73), a lower rate of postthrombotic syndrome (OR = 0.4; 95 % CI 0.19 to 0.96), and a lower rate of venous obstruction (OR = 0.20; 95 % CI 0.09 to 0.44). More major bleeding episodes occurred in the CDT group (Peto OR 2.0; 95 % CI 1.62 to 2.62). CDT was not found to reduce mortality, pulmonary embolism, or recurrent DVT.
CONCLUSIONS: Additional CDT therapy appeared to be more effective than standard anticoagulation treatment in improving the venous patency and preventing venous obstruction and postthrombotic syndrome. Caution should be taken when performing CDT given the increased risk of major bleeding. However, no evidence supported benefits of CDT in reducing mortality, recurrent DVT, or pulmonary embolism.