A Control Study Of Different Methods Of Volume Reduction In Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis Of Lower Extremity

PurposeTo explore the risk factors for the occurrence of deep venous thrombosis(DVT),and compare and analyze manual aspiration thrombectomy,MAT,Angiojet Rheolytic Thrombectomy(ART),and Chtheter-directed Thrommbosis(CDT)were used for the treatment of DVT.Analyze their advantages and disadvantages,and seek more reasonable treatment plan to reduce the incidence of complications in the medium and long term.MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed on 60 cases of DVT patients(course of disease ≤ 14 days)confirmed by lower extremity venous Doppler ultrasound examination or deep venous angiography in our hospital from June 2017 to June 2020.The clinical data of patients with contraindications to anticoagulant thrombolysis were not clear(the inclusion criteria referred to the diagnostic and staging criteria in the Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis,Third Edition).According to the purpose of the study,the patients were divided into groups according to different treatment methods: group A,30 patients were treated with MAT combined with CDT;Group B was treated with ART combined with CDT,10 cases;Group C only received CDT treatment,20 cases.Patients’ basic information,pathogenic factors,surgical efficacy,perioperative complications and other clinical data with research significance were collected,and SPSS 23.0 software was used for statistical analysis.Measurement data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation.One-way ANOVA was used for measurement data among the three groups.Intraoperative blood loss between groups A and B was tested by least significant difference(LSD)test.0.05 indicates that the difference is statistically significant.Risk factors for lower extremity deep vein thrombosis were retrospectively analyzed,the different treatment between the tolerance in patients with the treatment time,drug consumption,as well as the long-term complication rates and severity,and for different types of clinical patients,according to the different treatment requirements,in practical guidance and reference for the clinical treatment.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference in clinical success(i.e.,thrombus clearance rate greater than 50%)between the three groups.The short-term benefits of group A and group B,including CDT time,urokinase dosage,hind-leg circumference difference before treatment,and limb swelling reduction,were significantly better than those of group C.The follow-up at 6 months confirmed that the incidence of long-term complications was not statistically significant.ConclusionThere was no statistically significant difference in clinical success(i.e.,thrombus clearance rate greater than 50%)between the three groups.The short-term benefits of group A and group B,including CDT time,urokinase dosage,hind-leg circumference difference before treatment,and limb swelling reduction,were significantly better than those of group C.The follow-up at 6 months confirmed that the incidence of long-term complications was not statistically significant.