Early Clinical Analysis Of Different Treatments For Acute Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis

Objective To explore the early clinical efficacy of simple anticoagulation,catheter contact thrombolysis and dorsal vein thrombolysis in the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities,and provide a reference for clinical treatment of patients with deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities.Methods This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients with acute deep venous thrombosis in our lower limbs from December 2016 to December 2018.Patients were divided into anticoagulant therapy and thrombolytic therapy(including catheter thrombolysis and dorsal vein thrombolysis)depending on the patient’s treatment.Analyze and compare the different treatment options in terms of limb swelling,venous patency,thrombolysis,thrombolysis time,clinical efficacy,and adverse events.Results Comparison between thrombolytic group and anticoagulant group: The swelling rate of the size and leg of the thrombolytic group was(85.1±4.8)%、(84.3±5.2)%,which was significantly better than that of the anticoagulation group(72.5±8.2)%、(77.7±4.6)%.Learning difference(P<0.05),In terms of venous patency,the anticoagulant group reached(60.3±19.2)%after 14 days,while the thrombolytic group was(69.5±18.6)%.The data were statistically significant(P<0.05).In the anticoagulation group and the thrombolytic group,the cure rate and effective rate were 57.3% in the thrombolytic group and 4.0% in the anticoagulation group.The effective rate in the thrombolytic group was 96%,which was also significantly higher than that in the anticoagulation group.%,with significant statistical difference(P <0.05).The average treatment time in the anticoagulation group was(12.0±2.1)days,the average hospitalization time was(16.5±2.6)days,the average treatment time in the thrombolytic group was(6.2±1.5)days,and the average hospitalization time was(13.3±2.3)days.There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in treatment time and hospital stay(P<0.05).Comparison between thrombolytic groups: After 7 days of treatment,catheter contact thrombolysis for DVT was superior to the dorsal vein thrombolysis in the swelling of the affected limb,vascular patency,cure rate and clinical effective rate.The swelling rate of the legs was(34.6±7.2)%、(31.7±4.6)%,which was significantly better than that of the intravenous thrombolysis group(29.2±6.3)%、(27.5±5.2)%.The statistical difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).In terms of venous patency,the catheter thrombolytic group reached(59.2±11.2)% after 7 days of treatment,compared with(45.6±13.5)% in the intravenous thrombolysis group.The data were statistically significant(P < 0.05);catheter thrombolysis group and intravenous dissolution In the 7-day cure rate and effective rate,the cure rate of the catheter thrombolytic group was 44.4%,which was significantly higher than that of the intravenous thrombolytic group,20.0%,and the effective rate of the catheter thrombolytic group was 93.3%,which was also significantly higher than the intravenous thrombolytic group.73.3% had a statistically significant difference(P < 0.05).The average thrombolysis time was(5.9±1.1)days in the catheter thrombolysis group,the average hospital stay was(12.5±1.6)days,the average thrombolytic time in the intravenous thrombolysis group was(6.8±1.8)days,and the average hospital stay was(13.6±2.4)d.There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in thrombolysis time and hospitalization time(P<0.05).After 14 days of treatment,catheter contact thrombolysis for acute DVT was slightly better than the dorsal venous thrombolysis in the swelling of the affected limb,vascular patency,cure rate and clinical efficiency,but no statistical difference was found in the comparison of the data.Difference(P>0.05).In this study,there were 3 new cases of PE,5 cases of subcutaneous ecchymosis,6 cases of puncture point bleeding,8 cases of edema,and 4 cases of gingival and nasal bleeding.There was no statistically significant difference in data comparison(P>0.05).Conclusion 1.Three methods are safe and effective for the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis of the lower extremities.2.The early clinical effect of thrombolytic therapy is better than the simple drug anticoagulant therapy.3.Catheter thrombolysis can achieve thrombolytic effect more quickly than dorsal vein thrombolysis.The overall clinical effect is slightly higher than that of the dorsal vein thrombosis.