ObjectiveTo investigate the safety and efficacy of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). MethodsThe clinical data of 496 patients with DVT who were treated in our hospital from January 2010 to October 2014 were analyzed retrospectively, to compare the time of venous pressure decreased to normal (T1) and time of circumference difference decreased to normal (T2) in patients received pure therapy (control group) and pure therapy combined with IPC (combination group), according to different types of patients in acute, sub-acute, and chronic phase. In addition, comparison of the remission rate of pulmonary embolism (PE), incidence of PE, and recurrence of DVT was performed between the control group and combination group too. Results① For DVT patients in acute stage, the time of T1 and T2 of patients in central type, peripheral type, and mixed type who received anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis/catheter thrombolysis+IPC, were significantly shorter than those patients who received only anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis/catheter thrombolysis (P<0.05). For DVT patients in sub-acute stage, the time of T1 and T2 of patients in central type and mixed type who received anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis+IPC, were significantly shorter than those of patients who received only anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis (P<0.05), the time of T1 of patients in peripheral type who received anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis+IPC, were significantly shorter than those of patients who received only anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis (P<0.01), but the time of T2 of patients in peripheral type didn't differed between patients who received only anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis and anticoagulant therapy/systemic thrombolysis +IPC (P>0.05). For DVT patients in chronic stage, the time of T1 and T2 of patients in central type and mixed type didn't differed between patients who received only anticoagulant therapy and anticoagulant therapy +IPC (P>0.05); the time of T1 of patients in peripheral type who received anticoagulant therapy+IPC, were significantly shorter than those of patients who received only anticoagulant therapy (P<0.05), but the time of T2 didn't differed with each other (P>0.05). ② There were 63 patients in control group and 47 patients in combination group had PE before treatment. After the treatment, the PE symptom of control group relieved in 56 patients (88.89%, 56/63) and maintained in 7 patients (11.11%, 7/63), the symptom of combination group relieved in 44 patients (93.62%, 44/47) and maintained in 3 patients (6.38%, 3/47), so the remission rate of PE symptom in combination group was higher (P<0.05). There were 6 patients suffered from new PE in control group[4.26% (6/141)] and 0 in combination group[0 (0/245)] after treatment in patients who hadn't PE before treatment, and the incidence of PE was lower in combination group (P<0.05). ③ There were 325 patients were followed up for 3-36 months with the median time of 27 months, including 157 patents in control group and 168 patients in combination group. During the follow-up period, 74 patients recurred[47.13% (74/157)] in control group and 46 patients recurred[27.38% (46/168)] in combination group, and the recurrence rate was lower in combination group (P<0.05). In addition, 41 patients suffered from post-thrombotic syndrome[26.11% (41/157)] in control group and 27 patients[16.07% (27/168)] in combination group, and the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome was lower in combination group (P<0.05). ConclusionsIPC can significantly shorten the time of venous pressure and the circumference difference decreased to normal for DVT patients in acute stage and majority DVT patients in sub-acute stage, and it can relieve the clinical symptoms of PE, reduce the incidence rate of PE and recurrence rate of DVT. Therefore, IPC is a safe, reliable, and effective treatment for DVT patients in acute stage and majority DVT patients in sub-acute stage.
ObjectiveThis study was aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy using the AngioJet System for the treatment of lower extremity acute arterial embolism and thrombosis.MethodsThe clinical data of 20 patients with acute lower extremity arterial embolism and thrombosis admitted to the Department of Vascular Surgery in the People’s Hospital in Gansu Province where the author worked from September 2016 to March 2017, were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were treated with the AngioJet mechanical thrombectomy system. Clinical data of the patients were retrospectively collected. The clinical efficacy of AngioJet mechanical thrombectomy wasanalyzed.ResultsEighteen (90.0%) of the 20 patients successfully completed the mechanical thrombectomy by using the AngioJet System. The mean time for hospital stay and operation was (4.2±1.4) d and (1.3±0.4) h, respectively. The average doses of urokinase and heparin during operation were (35.80±12.30) ×104 U and (45.10±8.30) mg, respectively. Two patients received a complementary treatment of incision for removing the thrombus. Two patients received catheter-directed thrombolysis after the mechanical thrombectomy, 5 patients received bare-metal stent implantation after balloon expansion. Clinical success was in 16 cases. According to the Cooley standard, 10 patients were in excellent condition,6 in good condition, 2 in fair condition, and 2 in poor condition. There were 2 cases of distal arterial embolization,2 cases of antecardial discomfort of bradycardia, and 4 cases of bleeding at the puncture point, but no serious bleeding complications such as gastrointestinal and intracranial hemorrhage occurred. A total of 16 patients presented myoglobinuria during and after operation. All patients were followed up for 6–12 months. The results of ultrasound examination showed that the artery was patency in 15 cases. One patient died of myocardial infarction in 9 months after surgery,2 patients developed lower extremity ischemia symptoms again after surgery, and 2 patients had lower extremity ulcer caused by lower extremity ischemia symptoms. During the follow-up period, no lower limb necrosis, amputation, and death occurred in the remaining patients.ConclusionsThe AngioJet mechanical thrombectomy system is safe and effective. Combined with the use of catheter-directed thrombolysis and stent implantation, the AngioJet mechanical thrombectomy could lead to quick recovery of the perfusion of the lower extremity and improve the limb salvage rates, exhibiting excellent clinical value.
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical efficacy of transcatheter arterial embolization or transcatheter arterial embolization combined with percutaneous transhepatic sclerotherapy injection for hepatic cavernous hemangioma with different blood supply. MethodsEighty-six patients with hepatic cavernous hemangioma with different blood supply received femoral artery pingyangmycin iodized oil embolization or transcatheter arterial embolization combined with percutaneous transhepatic injection of pingyangmycin iodized oil embolization from February 2004 to April 2013. ResultsForty-five cases (52.3%) of tumor decreased by over 50%; 26 (30.2%) decreased by about 20% to 50%; 11 (12.8%) decreased by less than 20%; and 4 (4.7%) had no significant change in the tumor diameter. Patients did not have serious complications. ConclusionThe effect of individualized intervention for hepatic cavernous hemangioma with different blood supply is obvious, and it is a safe and effective therapeutic method.