Background: The ATTRACT Trial previously reported that pharmacomechanical catheterdirected thrombolysis (PCDT) did not prevent the post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients with acute proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). In the current analysis, we examine the effect of PCDT in ATTRACT patients with iliofemoral DVT. Methods: Within a large multicenter randomized trial, 391 patients with acute DVT involving the iliac and/or common femoral veins were randomized to PCDT with anticoagulation versus anticoagulation alone (No-PCDT) and were followed for 24 months to compare short-term and long-term outcomes. Results: Between 6 and 24 months, there was no difference in the occurrence of PTS (Villalta scale ≥5 or ulcer: 49% PCDT versus 51% No-PCDT; risk ratio (RR)=0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.78-1.15; p=0.59). PCDT led to reduced PTS severity as shown by: lower mean Villalta and Venous Clinical Severity Scores [VCSS] (p<0.01 for comparisons at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months); and fewer patients with moderate-or-severe PTS (Villalta scale ≥10 or ulcer: 18% versus 28%; RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.45-0.94, p=0.021) or severe PTS (Villalta scale ≥15 or ulcer: 8.7% versus 15%; RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.32-1.01, p=0.048; and VCSS ≥8: 6.6% versus 14%; RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.24-0.87, p=0.013). From baseline, PCDT led to greater reduction in leg pain and swelling (p<0.01 for comparisons at 10 and 30 days) and greater improvement in venous diseasespecific QOL (VEINES-QOL unit difference 5.6 through 24 months, p=0.029), but no difference in generic QOL (p > 0.2 for comparisons of SF-36 mental and physical component summary scores through 24 months). In patients having PCDT versus No-PCDT, major bleeding within 10 days occurred in 1.5% versus 0.5% (p=0.32), and recurrent VTE over 24 months was observed in 13% versus 9.2% (p=0.21). Conclusions: In patients with acute iliofemoral DVT, PCDT did not influence the occurrence of PTS or recurrent VTE. However, PCDT significantly reduced early leg symptoms and, over 24 Comerota et al.

Thrombosis of the inferior vena cava (IVC) is an under-recognized entity that is associated with significant short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. In absence of a congenital anomaly, the most common cause of IVC thrombosis is the presence of an unretrieved IVC filter. Due to the substantial increase in the number of IVC filters placed in the United States and the very low filter retrieval rates, clinicians are faced with a very large population of patients at risk for developing IVC thrombosis. Nevertheless, there is a paucity of data and societal guidelines with regards to the diagnosis and management of IVC thrombosis. This paper aims to enhance the awareness of this uncommon, but morbid, condition by providing a concise, yet comprehensive, review of the etiology, diagnostic approaches, and treatment strategies in patients with IVC thrombosis.

The role of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) in the treatment of acute proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is controversial, and the nationwide safety outcomes are unknown.OBJECTIVES The primary objective was to compare in-hospital outcomes of CDT plus anticoagulation with those of anticoagulation alone. The secondary objective was to evaluate the temporal trends in the utilization and outcomes of CDT in the treatment of proximal DVT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSObservational study of patients with a principal discharge diagnosis of proximal or caval DVT from 2005 to 2010 in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. We compared patients treated with CDT plus anticoagulation with the patients treated with anticoagulation alone. We used propensity scores to construct 2 matched groups of 3594 patients in each group for comparative outcomes analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included bleeding complications, length of stay, and hospital charges.RESULTS Among a total of 90 618 patients hospitalized for DVT (national estimate of 449 200 hospitalizations), 3649 (4.1%) underwent CDT. The CDT utilization rates increased from 2.3% in 2005 to 5.9% in 2010. Based on the propensity-matched comparison, the in-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the CDT and the anticoagulation groups (1.2% vs 0.9%) (OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.88-2.25]) (P = .15). The rates of blood transfusion (11.1% vs 6.5%) (OR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.57-2.20]) (P < .001), pulmonary embolism (17.9% vs 11.4%) (OR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.49-1.94]) (P < .001), intracranial hemorrhage (0.9% vs 0.3%) (OR, 2.72 [95% CI, 1.40-5.30]) (P = .03), and vena cava filter placement (34.8% vs 15.6%) (OR, 2.89 [95% CI, 2.58-3.23]) (P < .001) were significantly higher in the CDT group. The CDT group had longer mean (SD) length of stay (7.2 [5.8] vs 5.0 [4.7] days) (OR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.49-1.94])

No abstract

The objective of this study was to perform a hemodynamic evaluation of moderate (50-90%) renal artery stenosis (RAS) under conditions of rest and maximum hyperemia. Identifying patients with RAS who have hemodynamically significant stenoses and are most likely to benefit from revascularization is clinically important. Current methods used to evaluate RAS, including angiography, have limitations. Physiologic evaluation of RAS may have a role in identifying patients with hemodynamically significant stenosis. Patients with suspected renovascular hypertension due to aorto-ostial RAS were included in the study. Hyperemia was induced by administration of intrarenal papavarine. Translesional pressure gradients were measured and renal fractional flow reserve (FFR) was calculated using a 0.014'' pressure guidewire. Thirteen patients and 14 arteries with moderately severe (50-90%) RAS were studied. The mean translesional pressure gradient rose from a baseline of 6.3 +/- 3.9 to 17.5 +/- 10.8 mm Hg with maximal hyperemia. The renal FFR ranged from 0.58 to 0.95. There was a poor correlation between angiographic stenosis measurement and the renal FFR (r = -0.18; P = 0.54) and the hyperemic translesional mean pressure gradient (r = 0.22; P = 0.44). There was an excellent correlation between renal FFR and the resting mean translesional pressure gradient (r = -0.76; P = 0.0016) and the hyperemic mean translesional pressure gradient (r = -0.94; P < 0.0001). Selective renal arterial papavarine administration induces maximum hyperemia, permitting the calculation of renal FFR in renal arteries with aorto-ostial stenoses. The renal FFR correlates well with other hemodynamic parameters of lesion severity, but poorly with angiographic measures of lesion severity.