Patients with inferior vena cava (IVC) filter-associated deep venous thrombosis (DVT) are a challenging subset of patients for endovascular intervention. Given the lack of available data pertaining to this clinical scenario, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the authors' experience with the use of endovascular treatment for DVT in patients with IVC filters. Primary aims included assessing the technical and clinical success, complications, and clinical patency in these patients. This was a retrospective single-center review of adult patients with IVC filters undergoing endovascular treatment of DVT between 1/2005 and 4/2014. Patient electronic medical records were reviewed for demographic data, anticoagulation status, symptoms, symptomatic extremities, extent of thrombosis, therapies received, technical and clinical success, and complications. Query yielded 82 patients (mean 53 years, range 18-96; 66% male), all of whom were included in our analysis. The majority of patients presented with lower extremity pain and swelling, with extensive clot burden despite the use of anticoagulant medication. Treatment elements utilized included pharmacologic lysis in 92%, mechanical thrombectomy in 77%, angioplasty in 63% and stent placement in 50% of patients. Interventions were technically successful in restoring flow in 87% of patients, and clinically successful in improving presenting symptoms in 79% of patients. By SIR criteria, 24% of patients experienced complications (categorized as 10% minor and 14% major). There were two deaths from intracranial hemorrhage. The probability of thrombosis-free survival at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months was 0.85 (CI 0.74-0.93), 0.81 (CI 0.69-0.89), 0.74 (CI 0.62-0.83), 0.70 (CI 0.57-0.8) and 0.70 (CI 0.57-0.8), respectively. Endovascular interventions are usually effective in relieving symptoms in patients with DVT and pre-existing IVC filters. However, these outcomes are achieved with significant complication rates that may exceed those observed when endovascular therapy is provided for other DVT populations.

Background. Acute cholecystitis in severely cardiopathic patient after major cardiac surgery represent a challenge for surgeons. Treatment with cholecystostomy could represent a chance for patients even if there are many topics of greatest debate about it: the technique of performing it (if transhepatic or transpapillary), the timing of optimal duration, the timing of drain removal, the need of further examinations before the removal as well as the timing for de nitive surgery. We therefore deemed important to share our experience in the treatment of acute cholecystitis in a severe cardiopathic patient, while attempting to clarify all the major topics related to the management of percutaneous cholecystostomy through a literary review. Case presentation. A 58-year-old severly cardiopathic patient who had undergone surgery for hip replacement, developed an acute calcolous cholecystitis a few days after surgery to resolve which a percutaneous cholecystostomy was the chosen strategy. Two weeks after discharge, a cholangiography through the cholecystostomy and a MRI cholangiopancreatography revealed the presence of stones in the cystic duct and in the ductus choledochus. The de nitive treatment was decided after consulting with a multidisciplinary team. An open cholecystectomy with simultaneous removal of the cholecystostomy, endoscopic removal of stones and sphincterotomy of the Oddi papilla was performed. The patient is currently healthy and his heart function is satisfactory. Conclusion. Although early cholecystectomy is the recommended choice for acute cholecystitis, a critically ill patients may bene t from a bridging therapy before de nitive surgery. The multidisciplinary approach provided a safer solution for this frail patient. Competing interest:: Authors certify that there is no actual or potential con ict of interest in relation to this article and they state that there are no nancial interests or connections, direct or indirect, or other situations that might raise the question of bias in the work reported or the conclusions, implications, or opinions stated-including pertinent commercial or other sources of funding for the individual author(s) or for the associated department(s) or organization(s), personal relationships, or direct academic competition. Funding: The authors state that no funding has been received for this article. Authors' Contribution: All authors have approved the submitted version (and any substantially modi ed version that involves the author's contribution to the study),and have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.

Patients with cancer have an increased risk of thrombosis requiring anticoagulants and/or antiplatelet agents, and they can also encounter thrombocytopenia due to cancer itself or cancer therapies. They often undergo many procedures such as tissue or bone marrow biopsies, placement of central access lines, diagnostic or therapeutic draining procedures, lumbar puncture, and more. Management of antithrombotic agents or thrombocytopenia around the time of these procedures is highly variable.In this document, the Hemostasis and Malignancy Subcommittee of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis aims to provide useful practice guidance in the management of antithrombotic agents and thrombocytopenia around the time of common procedures in patients with cancer.

No abstract

No abstract