Project description:Approximately 10% of all deep vein thromboses occur in the upper extremity, and that number is increasing due to the use of peripherally inserted central catheters. Sequelae of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) are similar to those for lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (LEDVT) and include postthrombotic syndrome and pulmonary embolism. In addition to systemic anticoagulation, there are multiple interventional treatment options for UEDVT with the potential to reduce the incidence of these sequelae. To date, there have been no randomized trials to define the optimal management strategy for patients presenting with UEDVT, so many conclusions are drawn from smaller, single-center studies or from LEDVT research. In this article, the authors describe the evidence for the currently available treatment options and an approach to a patient with acute UEDVT.
Project description:BackgroundIdiopathic upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) management is controversial and ranges from anticoagulation alone to the addition of further interventions such as thrombolysis and decompressive surgery.ObjectivesThe objective of this systematic review was to assess the effects of anticoagulation alone compared to anticoagulation with additional interventions such as thrombolysis or decompressive surgery on the incidence of recurrent UEDVT and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients with idiopathic UEDVT (including those associated with the oral contraceptive pill).Patients/methodsA systematic search was conducted for studies which focused on acute UEDVT treatment defined as therapies starting within 4 weeks of symptom onset. We limited studies to those that recruited 10 or more subjects and involved at least 6 weeks to 12 months anticoagulation alone or together with additional interventions with at least 6-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were symptomatic recurrent radiologically confirmed UEDVT and PTS. Secondary outcomes were symptomatic venous thromboembolism, bleeding and mortality.ResultsWe found seven studies which reported recurrent UEDVT rates and five that reported PTS rates. All studies were retrospective or cross-sectional. None compared anticoagulation alone to anticoagulation with additional intervention. Study heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis and risk of bias was moderate to serious. Recurrent UEDVT occurred in 0% to 12% post-anticoagulation alone and 0% to 23% post-additional interventions. PTS rates varied from 4% to 32% without severe PTS. Only limited studies reported on our secondary outcomes.ConclusionThere is limited evidence behind idiopathic UEDVT management. Prospective comparative studies in this area are essential.
Project description:Objectives: We aimed to investigate the clinical features of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the background, thrombus site, treatment, and outcome of 76 UEDVT patients. Results: Of the 76 UEDVT patients, 44 (57.9%) were men, and 51 (67.1%) were complicated by malignancy, 44 (57.9%) had an indwelling central vein (CV) catheter, 8 (10.5%) had concomitant pulmonary embolization (PE), and 33 (43.3%) were symptomatic. Regarding the thrombus site, the right internal jugular vein was the most common, with 30 cases (35.3%). As regards the treatment method, 53 patients (69.7%) received oral anticoagulants. In 2015, when direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) was covered by insurance, there were 44 UEDVT cases, of which 34 (77.3%) received DOACs. Outcomes at a mean observation period of 37.5±41.5 months included 40 deaths (52.6%) with a mean survival of 16.3±21.3 months. The most common cause of death was malignancy, with 33 cases (82.5%). Conclusion: In the background of UEDVT, the combination of indwelling CV catheter placement and malignancy was frequently observed. While the risk of recurrence or PE complications is low, the prognosis of UEDVT complicated by malignancy is extremely poor.
Project description:Chronic upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) and superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) are important and underdiagnosed entities that are associated with significant morbidity, and both are becoming increasingly common due to the use of indwelling catheters and implantable central venous access devices. Currently, as many as 25% of patients with an indwelling catheter are diagnosed with chronic UEDVT or venous stenosis. SVCS is most commonly seen in the setting of malignancy, especially lung cancer and lymphoma. Endovascular management of chronic UEDVT and SVCS is accepted as an important first-line treatment given its high overall success rate and low morbidity as compared with medical and surgical treatments. In this article, the indications for treatment, complications, and success rates of the endovascular management of UEDVT and SVCS are reviewed. Relevant findings on presentation and physical exam as well as various imaging modalities and imaging findings are evaluated. Details of preprocedure evaluation, relevant anatomy, and avoidance of potential complications are discussed.
Project description:BackgroundCompression ultrasonography (CUS) is the first-line imaging test for diagnosing upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT), but often yields inconclusive test results. Contrast venography is still considered the diagnostic standard but is an invasive technique.ObjectivesWe aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance noncontrast thrombus imaging (MR-NCTI) for the diagnosis of UEDVT.MethodsIn this international multicenter diagnostic study, we prospectively included patients with clinically suspected UEDVT who were managed according to a diagnostic algorithm that included a clinical decision rule (CDR), D-dimer test, and diagnostic imaging. UEDVT was confirmed by CUS or (computed tomography [CT]) venography. UEDVT was excluded by (1) an unlikely CDR and normal D-dimer, (2) a normal serial CUS or (3) a normal (CT) venography. Within 48 h after the final diagnosis was established, patients underwent MR-NCTI. MR-NCTI images were assessed post hoc by two independent radiologists unaware of the presence or absence of UEDVT. The sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement of MR-NCTI for UEDVT were determined.ResultsMagnetic resonance noncontrast thrombus imaging demonstrated UEDVT in 28 of 30 patients with UEDVT and was normal in all 30 patients where UEDVT was ruled out, yielding a sensitivity of 93% (95% CI 78-99) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 88-100). The interobserver agreement of MR-NCTI had a kappa value of 0.83 (95% CI 0.69-0.97).ConclusionsMagnetic resonance noncontrast thrombus imaging is an accurate and reproducible method for diagnosing UEDVT. Clinical outcome studies should determine whether MR-NCTI can replace venography as the second-line imaging test in case of inconclusive CUS.
Project description:ObjectivesPrimary deep vein thrombosis of the upper extremity (UEDVT) is a rare condition but up to 60% of patients may develop post-thrombotic syndrome in the upper extremity (UE-PTS) with significant morbidity and decreased quality of life. However, there is no universally accepted method to diagnose and classify UE-PTS, hampering scientific research on UEDVT treatment. Through this international Delphi consensus study we aimed to determine what a clinical score for diagnosing UE-PTS should entail.MethodsAn online focus group survey among 20 patients treated for UEDVT was performed to provide clinical parameters before the start of a four round electronic Delphi consensus study among 25 international experts. The CREDES recommendations on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies were applied. Open text questions, multiple selection questions, and 9-point Likert scales were used. Consensus was set at 70% agreement.ResultsAfter four rounds, agreement was reached on a composite score of five symptoms and three clinical signs, combined with a functional disability score. The signs and symptom will each be scored on a severity scale of 0-3 and the total score expressed as an ordinal variable; no/mild/moderate/or severe PTS. The functional disability portion measures the impact of the signs and symptoms on the functionality of the patient's arm.ConclusionConsensus was reached on a composite score of signs and symptoms of UE-PTS combined with a functional disability score. Clinical validation of the UE-PTS score in a large patient cohort is mandatory to facilitate application in future research.
Project description:The cumulative incidence, risk factors, rate of subsequent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding and impact on mortality of isolated upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UE DVT) in acute leukemia are not well-described. The California Cancer Registry, used to identify treated patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) diagnosed between 2009 and 2014, was linked with the statewide hospitalization database to determine cumulative incidences of UE DVT and subsequent VTE and bleeding after UE DVT diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the association of UE DVT on the risk of subsequent pulmonary embolism (PE) or lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (LE DVT) and subsequent bleeding, and the impact of UE DVT on mortality. There were 5,072 patients identified: 3,252 had AML and 1,820 had ALL. Three- and 12-month cumulative incidences of UE DVT were 4.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.1-5.6) and 6.6% (95% CI: 5.8-7.5) for AML and 4.1% (95% CI: 3.2-5.1) and 5.9% (95% CI: 4.9-7.1) for ALL, respectively. Twelve-month cumulative incidences of subsequent VTE after an incident UE DVT diagnosis were 5.3% for AML and 12.2% for ALL. Twelve-month cumulative incidences of subsequent bleeding after an incident UE DVT diagnosis were 15.4% for AML and 21.1% for ALL. UE DVT was associated with an increased risk of subsequent bleeding for both AML (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.07; 95% CI: 1.60-2.68) and ALL (HR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.02-2.57) but was not an independent risk factor for subsequent PE or LE DVT for either leukemia subtype. Isolated incident UE DVT was associated with increased leukemia-specific mortality for AML (HR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.16-1.73) and ALL (HR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.31-2.47). UE DVT is a relatively common complication among patients with AML and ALL and has a significant impact on bleeding and mortality. Further research is needed to determine appropriate therapy for this high-risk population.
Project description:Pheochromocytomas are rare catecholamine-secreting neoplasms, occurring in approximately 0.1-0.5% of the patients with hypertension. Typically, a pheochromocytoma presents with hypertension, a paroxysm of headaches, sweating, and palpitation. However, patients may also present with atypical clinical manifestations on rare occasions. This report presents a case involving a young woman who presented with two rare manifestations of pheochromocytomas: congestive heart failure and right upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Her cardiomyopathy was completely resolved by surgical and medical therapy, while DVT was resolved with anticoagulation. Pheochromocytoma should be considered in case of sudden and unexplained cardiac failure and/or DVT. Pheochromocytoma-induced cardiomyopathy can be reversed with medical and/or surgical therapy for pheochromocytomas.
Project description:We report a case of peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC)-associated deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Ultrasound images and video of subclavian thrombus are presented. PICC line-associated DVT, particularly in cancer patients is not uncommon. Point-of-care Emergency Department ultrasound can readily diagnose this complication and device removal is not always necessary.