Jean-Philippe Galanaud

Comparative study on risk factors and early outcome of symptomatic distal versus proximal deep vein thrombosis: Results from the OPTIMEV study

There is a lack of consensus on the value of detecting and treating symptomatic isolated distal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower limbs. In our study, we compared the risk factors and outcomes in patients with isolated symptomatic distal DVT with those with proximal symptomatic DVT. We analysed the data of patients with objectively confirmed symptomatic isolated DVT enrolled in the national (France), multicenter, prospective OPTIMEV study. This sub-study outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and death at three months. Among the 6141 patients with suspicion of isolated DVT included between November 2004 and January 2006, DVT was confirmed in 1643 patients (26.8%). Isolated distal DVT was more frequent than proximal DVT (56.8% vs. 43.2%, respectively; p = 0.01). Isolated distal DVT was significantly more often associated with transient risk factors (recent surgery, recent plaster immobilisation, recent travel), whereas proximal DVT was significantly more associated with more chronic states (active cancer, congestive heart failure or respiratory insufficiency, age >75 years). Most patients (96.8%) with isolated distal DVT received anticoagulant therapies. There was no difference in the percentage of recurrent venous thromboembolism and major bleeding in patients with proximal DVT and isolated distal DVT. However, the mortality rate was significantly higher (p < 0.01) in patients with proximal DVT (8.0%) than in those with isolated distal DVT (4.4%). Symptomatic isolated distal DVT differs from symptomatic proximal DVT both in terms of risk factors and clinical outcome. Whether these differences should influence the clinical management of these two events remains to be determined.

Predictive factors for concurrent deep-vein thrombosis and symptomatic venous thromboembolic recurrence in case of superficial venous thrombosis. The OPTIMEV study.

Superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) prognosis is debated and its management is highly variable. It was the objective of this study to assess predictive risk factors for concurrent deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) at presentation and for three-month adverse outcome. Using data from the prospective multicentre OPTIMEV study, we analysed SVT predictive factors associated with concurrent DVT and three-month adverse outcome. Out of 788 SVT included, 227 (28.8%) exhibited a concurrent DVT at presentation. Age >75years (odds ratio [OR]=2.9 [1.5-5.9]), active cancer (OR=2.6 [1.3-5.2]), inpatient status (OR=2.3 [1.2-4.4]) and SVT on non-varicose veins (OR=1.8 [1.1-2.7]) were significantly and independently associated with an increased risk of concurrent DVT. 39.4% of SVT on non-varicose veins presented a concurrent DVT. However, varicose vein status did not influence the three-month prognosis as rates of death, symptomatic venous thromboembolic (VTE) recurrence and major bleeding were equivalent in both non-varicose and varicose SVTs (1.4% vs. 1.1%; 3.4% vs. 2.8%; 0.7% vs. 0.3%). Only male gender (OR=3.5 [1.1-11.3]) and inpatient status (OR=4.5 [1.3-15.3]) were independent predictive factors for symptomatic VTE recurrence but the number of events was low (n=15, 3.0%). Three-month numbers of deaths (n=6, 1.2%) and of major bleedings (n=2, 0.4%) were even lower, precluding any relevant interpretation. In conclusion, SVT on non-varicose veins and some classical risk factors for DVT were predictive factors for concurrent DVT at presentation. As SVT remains mostly a clinical diagnosis, these data may help selecting patients deserving an ultrasound examination or needing anticoagulation while waiting for diagnostic tests. Larger studies are needed to evaluate predictive factors for adverse outcome.

Comparative incidence of a first thrombotic event in purely obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome with pregnancy loss: the NOH-APS observational study.

The incidence of thrombosis in the purely obstetric form of antiphospholipid syndrome is uncertain. We performed a 10-year observational study of 1592 nonthrombotic women who had experienced 3 consecutive spontaneous abortions before the 10th week of gestation or 1 fetal death at or beyond the 10th week of gestation. We compared the frequencies of thrombotic events among women positive for antiphospholipid Abs (n = 517), women carrying the F5 6025 or F2 rs1799963 polymorphism (n = 279), and women with negative thrombophilia screening results (n = 796). The annual rates of deep vein thrombosis (1.46%; range, 1.15%-1.82%), pulmonary embolism (0.43%; range, 0.26%-0.66%), superficial vein thrombosis (0.44%; range, 0.28%-0.68%), and cerebrovascular events (0.32%; range, 0.18%-0.53%) were significantly higher in aPLAbs women than in the other groups despite low-dose aspirin primary prophylaxis. Women carrying 1 of the 2 polymorphisms did not experience more thrombotic events than women who screened negative for thrombophilia. Lupus anticoagulant was a risk factor for unprovoked proximal and distal deep and superficial vein thrombosis and women in the upper quartile of lupus anticoagulant activity had the highest risk. Despite data suggesting that aPLAbs may induce pregnancy loss through nonthrombotic mechanisms, women with purely obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome are at risk for thrombotic complications.

Guidance for the prevention and treatment of the post-thrombotic syndrome

The post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) is a frequent, potentially disabling complication of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) that reduces quality of life and is costly. Clinical manifestations include symptoms and signs such as leg pain and heaviness, edema, redness, telangiectasia, new varicose veins, hyperpigmentation, skin thickening and in severe cases, leg ulcers. The best way to prevent PTS is to prevent DVT with pharmacologic or mechanical thromboprophylaxis used in high risk patients and settings. In patients whose DVT is treated with a vitamin K antagonist, subtherapeutic INRs should be avoided. We do not suggest routine use of elastic compression stockings (ECS) after DVT to prevent PTS, but in patients with acute DVT-related leg swelling that is bothersome, a trial of ECS is reasonable. We suggest that selecting patients for catheter-directed thrombolytic techniques be done on a case-by-case basis, with a focus on patients with extensive thrombosis, recent symptoms onset, and low bleeding risk, who are seen at experienced hospital centers. For patients with established PTS, we suggest prescribing 20–30 mm Hg knee-length ECS to be worn daily. If ineffective, a stronger pressure stocking can be tried. We suggest that intermittent compression devices or pneumatic compression sleeve units be tried in patients with moderate-to-severe PTS whose symptoms are inadequately controlled with ECS alone. We suggest that a supervised exercise training program for 6 months or more is reasonable for PTS patients who can tolerate it. We suggest that management of post-thrombotic ulcers should involve a multidisciplinary approach. We briefly discuss upper extremity PTS and PTS in children.

Anticoagulant therapy for symptomatic calf deep vein thrombosis (CACTUS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUNDnThe efficacy and safety of anticoagulant treatment is not established for patients with acute symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the calf. We aimed to assess whether therapeutic anticoagulation is superior to placebo in patients with symptomatic calf DVT.nnnMETHODSnIn this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled low-risk outpatients (without active cancer or previous venous thromboembolic disease) with a first acute symptomatic DVT in the calf from 23 university medical centres or community medical clinics in Canada, France, and Switzerland. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to receive either the low-molecular-weight heparin nadroparin (171 UI/kg, subcutaneously, once a day) or placebo (saline 0·9%, subcutaneously, once a day) for 6 weeks (42 days). Central randomisation was done using a computer-generated randomisation list, stratified by study centre. Random allocation sequences of variable block size were centrally determined by an independent research clinical centre. Study staff, patients, and outcome assessors (central adjudication committee) were masked to group assignment. Numbered boxes of active drug or placebo were provided to pharmacies in identical packaging. All patients were prescribed compression stockings and followed up for 90 days. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite measure of extension of calf DVT to proximal veins, contralateral proximal DVT, and symptomatic pulmonary embolism at day 42 in the modified intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding at day 42. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00421538.nnnFINDINGSnBetween Feb 1, 2008, and Nov 30, 2014, we screened 746 patients, enrolling 259 patients (50% of the prespecified sample size), before the trial steering committee terminated the trial because of expiry of study drug and slow recruitment. The intention-to-treat analysis population comprised 122 patients in the nadroparin group and 130 in the placebo group. There was no significant difference between the groups in the composite primary outcome, which occurred in four patients (3%) in the nadroparin group and in seven (5%) in the placebo group (risk difference -2·1%, 95% CI -7·8 to 3·5; p=0·54). Bleeding occurred in five patients (4%) in the nadroparin group and no patients in the placebo group (risk difference 4·1, 95% CI 0·4 to 9·2; p=0·0255). In the nadroparin group one patient died from metastatic pancreatic cancer and one patient was diagnosed with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type 2.nnnINTERPRETATIONnNadroparin was not superior to placebo in reducing the risk of proximal extension or venous thromboembolic events in low-risk outpatients with symptomatic calf DVT, but did increase the risk of bleeding. Avoidance of systematic anticoagulation for calf DVT could have a substantial impact on individual patients and from a public health perspective.nnnFUNDINGnSwiss National Science Foundation, the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique in France, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Graduated compression stockings to treat acute leg pain associated with proximal DVT. A randomised controlled trial.

Acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) causes leg pain. Elastic compression stockings (ECS) have potential to relieve DVT-related leg pain by diminishing the diameter of distended veins and increasing venous blood flow. It was our objective to determine whether ECS reduce leg pain in patients with acute DVT. We performed a secondary analysis of the SOX Trial, a multicentre randomised placebo controlled trial of active ECS versus placebo ECS to prevent the post-thrombotic syndrome.The study was performed in 24 hospital centres in Canada and the U.S. and included 803 patients with a first episode of acute proximal DVT. Patients were randomised to receive active ECS (knee length, 30-40 mm Hg graduated pressure) or placebo ECS (manufactured to look identical to active ECS, but lacking therapeutic compression). Study outcome was leg pain severity assessed on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale (0, no pain; 10, worst possible pain) at baseline, 14, 30 and 60 days after randomisation. Mean age was 55 years and 60% were male. In active ECS patients (n=409), mean (SD) pain severity at baseline and at 60 days were 5.18 (3.29) and 1.39 (2.19), respectively, and in placebo ECS patients (n=394) were 5.38 (3.29) and 1.13 (1.86), respectively. There were no significant differences in pain scores between groups at any assessment point, and no evidence for subgroup interaction by age, sex or anatomical extent of DVT. Results were similar in an analysis restricted to patients who reported wearing stockings every day. In conclusion, ECS do not reduce leg pain in patients with acute proximal DVT.

Comparison of the clinical history of symptomatic isolated muscular calf vein thrombosis versus deep calf vein thrombosis

BACKGROUNDnHalf of all lower limb deep vein thromboses (DVT) are distal DVT that are equally distributed between muscular calf vein thromboses (MCVT) and deep calf vein thromboses (DCVT). Despite their high prevalence, MCVT and DCVT have never been compared so far, which prevents possible modulation of distal DVT management according to the kind of distal DVT (MCVT or DCVT).nnnMETHODSnUsing data from the French, multicenter, prospective observational OPTimisation de lInterrogatoire dans lévaluation du risque throMbo-Embolique Veineux (OPTIMEV) study, we compared the clinical presentation and risk factors of 268 symptomatic isolated DCVT and 457 symptomatic isolated MCVT and the 3-month outcomes of the 222 DCVT and 390 MCVT that were followed-up.nnnRESULTSnDuring the entire follow-up, 86.5% of DCVT patients and 76.7% of MCVT patients were treated with anticoagulant drugs (P = .003). MCVT was significantly more associated with localized pain than DCVT (30.4% vs 22.4%, P = .02) and less associated with swelling (47.9% vs 62.7%, P < .001). MCVT and DCVT patients exhibited the same risk factors profile, except that recent surgery was slightly more associated with DCVT (odds ratio, 1.70%; confidence interval, 1.06-2.75), and had equivalent comorbidities as evaluated by the Charlson index. At 3 months, no statistically significant difference was noted between MCVT and DCVT in death (3.8% vs 4.1%), venous thromboembolism recurrence (1.5% vs 1.4%), and major bleeding (0% vs 0.5%).nnnCONCLUSIONnIsolated symptomatic MCVT and DCVT exhibit different clinical symptoms at presentation but affect the same patient population. Under anticoagulant treatment and in the short-term, isolated distal DVT constitutes a homogeneous entity. Therapeutic trials are needed to determine a consensual mode of care of MCVT and DCVT.

Mondor's disease: What's new since 1939?

Mondors disease (MD) is a rare and self-limited benign disease first described in 1939. Originally its clinical presentation was a superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) without contiguous skin inflammation of the chest wall veins. Over time its definition has evolved and now also includes subcutaneous thrombosis of the dorsal vein of the penis but also retractile scarring of the fascia after breast surgery without concomitant SVT. In all cases clinical examination constitutes the first step of diagnostic management. It is followed by an ultrasound exploration (US) to search for a thrombus. In about half of all cases the disease is considered as idiopathic and cancer is rare. Whatever the location considered, the follow-up is usually uneventful with low rates of recurrence and of subsequent cancer. Treatment is debated and ranges from therapeutic abstention to anticoagulants or even surgery. It is likely that the new locations and mechanisms (without thrombosis) of the MD have lead to the constitution of a heterogeneous entity precluding from a consensual mode of care.

The Post-Thrombotic Syndrome: A 2012 Therapeutic Update

Opinion statementPost-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) refers to chronic manifestations of venous insufficiency following a deep-vein thrombosis (DVT). It is a frequent, chronic, burdensome and costly disease for which therapeutic options are limited. Above all, the optimal management of PTS consists of preventing its occurrence: first, by preventing DVT, and second, by preventing development of PTS after a DVT. Prevention of DVT is challenging, particularly in the case of nonsurgical hospital inpatients, where physician’s adherence to recommended thromboprophylaxis is often low. In our opinion, this adherence should be improved by generalizing the use of multi-component approaches, including that of automatic reminders. For prevention of PTS after an acute DVT, our recommendations are as follows. After a proximal (popliteal and above) DVT we recommend early ambulation with daily use of 30–40xa0mmHg graduated elastic compression stockings (ECS) for two years, in addition to careful monitoring of anticoagulant therapy. Below-knee ECS are preferred to thigh-length ECS, as they have similar efficacy in preventing PTS and are better tolerated. To improve compliance with ECS, patient education is important, and use of lighter strengths of compression in patients not tolerating traditional strengths should be considered. Catheter-directed thrombolysis of acute DVT was recently shown to be effective in preventing PTS, but we believe that confirmatory studies are needed before recommending its general use. The cornerstone of management of established PTS relies on patient education and use of compression therapy. We encourage ambulation, use of ECS to manage symptoms, and participation in an exercise training program, which has the potential to improve patients’ quality of life (QOL) and PTS scores. In the absence of symptom relief, ECS that provide a higher strength (40–50xa0mmHg) should be tried. In case of moderate to severe PTS, intermittent compressive devices can be used to improve PTS symptoms. Surgery and endovascular procedures, including balloon angioplasty, stent placement, endovenectomy or valve reconstruction should be considered only in specialized centers, and only for patients with severe PTS for whom previous conservative treatment has failed. These techniques are still under evaluation and the level of evidence supporting their use is low.

Risk factors and early outcomes of patients with symptomatic distal vs. proximal deep-vein thrombosis.

Purpose of review Isolated distal deep-vein thrombosis (iDDVT) is a distal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) without proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism. Although its clinical significance is uncertain, its prevalence is increasing with the use of whole leg compression ultrasonography. Epidemiological data giving reported rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are scarce, and there is potential conflict regarding the need to treat with anticoagulant drugs. Therefore, iDDVT management varies widely from one country/physician to another. Recent findings Data are available from two large multicenter observational studies of iDDVT and proximal DVT without pulmonary embolism (iPDVT), comparing risk factor profiles and early prognosis, and also from clinical trials on iDDVT. Summary iDDVT and iPDVT differ in terms of risk factor profile, iPDVT being more associated with chronic risk factors and iDDVT with transient ones. In the short term, case fatality rates associated with iDDVT suggest that it is a clinically relevant entity and should at least be diagnosed. From a therapeutic point of view, differences in population profile and outcomes between iPDVT and iDDVT, and results from recent clinical trials in favor of a modest VTE potential of iDDVT indicate that specific randomized double-blind trials are necessary to determine an appropriate and accepted mode of care for iDDVT.