A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 12-Month Patency After Intervention for Iliofemoral Obstruction Using Dedicated or Non-Dedicated Venous Stents.
DVT
nitinol stent
stent
thrombosis
venous occlusion
Journal
Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists
ISSN: 1545-1550
Titre abrégé: J Endovasc Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100896915
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2022
06 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
12
11
2021
medline:
14
5
2022
entrez:
11
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Endovascular stenting of the deep venous system has been proposed as a method to treat patients with symptomatic iliofemoral outflow obstruction. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness of this treatment at 1-year following the development of dedicated venous stents. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies evaluating the effectiveness of venous stent placement. Data were extracted by disease pathogenesis: non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions (NIVL), acute thrombotic (DVT), or post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). Main outcomes included technical success, stent patency at 1 year and symptom relief. A total of 49 studies reporting outcomes in 5154 patients (NIVL, 1431; DVT, 950; PTS, 2773) were included in the meta-analysis. Technical success rates were comparable among groups (97%-100%). There were no periprocedural deaths. Minor bleeding was reported in up to 5% of patients and major bleeding in 0.5% upon intervention. Transient back pain was noted in 55% of PTS patients following intervention. There was significant heterogeneity between studies reporting outcomes in PTS patients. Primary and cumulative patency at 1 year was: NIVL-96% and 100%; DVT-91% and 97%; PTS (stents above the ligament)-77% and 94%, and; PTS (stents across the ligament)-78% and 94%. There were insufficient data to compare patency outcomes of dedicated and nondedicated venous stents in patients with acute DVT. In NIVL and PTS patients, stent patency was comparable at 1 year. There was inconsistency in the use of validated tools for the measurement of symptoms before and after intervention. When reported, venous claudication, improved in 83% of PTS patients and 90% of NIVL patients, and ulcer healing occurred in 80% of PTS patients and 32% of NIVL patients. The first generation of dedicated venous stents perform comparably in terms of patency and clinical outcomes to non-dedicated technologies at 1 year for the treatment of patients with NIVL and PTS. However, significant heterogeneity exists between studies and standardized criteria are urgently needed to report outcomes in patients undergoing deep venous stenting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Endovascular stenting of the deep venous system has been proposed as a method to treat patients with symptomatic iliofemoral outflow obstruction. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness of this treatment at 1-year following the development of dedicated venous stents.
METHOD AND RESULTS
We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies evaluating the effectiveness of venous stent placement. Data were extracted by disease pathogenesis: non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions (NIVL), acute thrombotic (DVT), or post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). Main outcomes included technical success, stent patency at 1 year and symptom relief. A total of 49 studies reporting outcomes in 5154 patients (NIVL, 1431; DVT, 950; PTS, 2773) were included in the meta-analysis. Technical success rates were comparable among groups (97%-100%). There were no periprocedural deaths. Minor bleeding was reported in up to 5% of patients and major bleeding in 0.5% upon intervention. Transient back pain was noted in 55% of PTS patients following intervention. There was significant heterogeneity between studies reporting outcomes in PTS patients. Primary and cumulative patency at 1 year was: NIVL-96% and 100%; DVT-91% and 97%; PTS (stents above the ligament)-77% and 94%, and; PTS (stents across the ligament)-78% and 94%. There were insufficient data to compare patency outcomes of dedicated and nondedicated venous stents in patients with acute DVT. In NIVL and PTS patients, stent patency was comparable at 1 year. There was inconsistency in the use of validated tools for the measurement of symptoms before and after intervention. When reported, venous claudication, improved in 83% of PTS patients and 90% of NIVL patients, and ulcer healing occurred in 80% of PTS patients and 32% of NIVL patients.
CONCLUSIONS
The first generation of dedicated venous stents perform comparably in terms of patency and clinical outcomes to non-dedicated technologies at 1 year for the treatment of patients with NIVL and PTS. However, significant heterogeneity exists between studies and standardized criteria are urgently needed to report outcomes in patients undergoing deep venous stenting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34758673
doi: 10.1177/15266028211057085
pmc: PMC9096580
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
478-492Références
J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2009 Nov;28(4):465-76
pubmed: 19224134
Tex Heart Inst J. 2009;36(1):76-7
pubmed: 19436795
Chin Med J (Engl). 2013;126(18):3519-22
pubmed: 24034101
Vasa. 2017 Mar;46(2):121-126
pubmed: 28247824
Ann Intern Med. 1996 Jul 1;125(1):1-7
pubmed: 8644983
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2017 Jan;5(1):8-17
pubmed: 27987616
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2017 Jul;5(4):500-505
pubmed: 28623984
Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2019 Apr;34(2):131-138
pubmed: 29948590
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005 Jun;16(6):815-22
pubmed: 15947045
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Dec;12(12):e008268
pubmed: 31833414
J Vasc Surg. 2009 Aug;50(2):360-8
pubmed: 19446993
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2012 Apr 1;69(7):567-72
pubmed: 22441786
Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2019 Jul;53(5):373-378
pubmed: 30935347
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Dec;13(12):e009673
pubmed: 33272030
Ann Surg. 2004 Jan;239(1):118-26
pubmed: 14685109
Vasc Specialist Int. 2015 Jun;31(2):47-53
pubmed: 26217644
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2016 Dec;52(6):839-846
pubmed: 27751714
Br J Health Psychol. 2017 Feb;22(1):8-25
pubmed: 27611117
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2017 Jan;5(1):47-59
pubmed: 27987609
Ann Intern Med. 2008 Nov 18;149(10):698-707
pubmed: 19017588
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017 Dec;54(6):745-751
pubmed: 28886989
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2021 Mar;9(2):393-400.e2
pubmed: 32827734
Phlebology. 2015 Mar;30(2):77-84
pubmed: 24668998
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2015 Oct;3(4):380-388
pubmed: 26992615
Thromb Res. 2019 Dec;184:62-66
pubmed: 31707153
Ann Vasc Surg. 2018 Jul;50:1-7
pubmed: 29496568
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2019 Aug;42(8):1117-1127
pubmed: 31062068
CVIR Endovasc. 2018;1(1):29
pubmed: 30652160
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Oct;8(10):e002772
pubmed: 26438686
J Vasc Surg. 2007 Nov;46(5):979-990
pubmed: 17980284
J Thromb Haemost. 2019 Oct;17(10):1707-1714
pubmed: 31265193
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2016 Jan;51(1):100-20
pubmed: 26464055
Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2016 Dec;6(6):623-631
pubmed: 28123982
J Artif Organs. 2018 Jun;21(2):254-260
pubmed: 29411167
Circ J. 2014;78(5):1234-9
pubmed: 24583973
Ann Vasc Surg. 2014 Apr;28(3):695-704
pubmed: 24559785
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010 Mar;39(3):349-55
pubmed: 20060755
Vasa. 2021 Jan;50(1):52-58
pubmed: 32697148
Vasa. 2019 Mar;48(2):175-180
pubmed: 30451095
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010 Aug;40(2):234-40
pubmed: 20570187
Am J Med. 2001 May;110(7):515-9
pubmed: 11343664
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1994 Jul;31(1):49-53
pubmed: 8021371
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018 Feb;55(2):222-228
pubmed: 29292209
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2016 Aug;6(4):342-352
pubmed: 27709070
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007 Jul;34(1):87-91
pubmed: 17324594
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2013 Jul;1(3):270-5
pubmed: 26992586
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2020 Jan;8(1):24-30
pubmed: 31327743
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017 Nov;54(5):620-628
pubmed: 28797661
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2016 Apr;4(2):167-71
pubmed: 26993862
BMJ Open. 2019 Feb 19;9(2):e024805
pubmed: 30782919
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2021 May;9(3):760-769
pubmed: 32890743
J Thromb Haemost. 2017 Jul;15(7):1351-1360
pubmed: 28440041
J Wound Care. 2001 Oct;10(9):355-60
pubmed: 12964280
Ann Vasc Surg. 2014 Aug;28(6):1493-500
pubmed: 24727397
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2018 Mar;6(2):192-200
pubmed: 29290601
Phlebology. 2017 Apr;32(3):200-206
pubmed: 27022012
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2014 Jan;47(1):68-74
pubmed: 24183245
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2017 Mar;28(3):373-379
pubmed: 28110873
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2019 Mar;7(2):153-161
pubmed: 30660580
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2014 Jan;2(1):2-7
pubmed: 26992961
Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2015 Oct;30(4):320-6
pubmed: 25708707
Arch Intern Med. 2002 May 27;162(10):1144-8
pubmed: 12020185
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2019 Jul;7(4):592-600
pubmed: 31068275
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Sep;195(3):751-7
pubmed: 20729456
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017 Oct;54(4):495-503
pubmed: 28778457
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2018 Jul;6(4):457-463
pubmed: 29909853
J Endovasc Ther. 2018 Feb;25(1):133-139
pubmed: 28618846
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2020 Nov;8(6):953-960
pubmed: 32321693
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2019 Jan;7(1):45-55
pubmed: 30558730
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018 Nov;56(5):710-718
pubmed: 30139572
Chin Med J (Engl). 2011 Oct;124(20):3281-4
pubmed: 22088521
J Vasc Surg. 2000 Apr;31(4):642-9
pubmed: 10753271
Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2010 Jul;44(5):356-60
pubmed: 20484062
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015 Jul;50(1):101-7
pubmed: 25920630
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014 Jun;25(6):925-32
pubmed: 24768326
J Thromb Haemost. 2012 May;10(5):840-7
pubmed: 22452811
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2020 Jan;8(1):145-153
pubmed: 31699668
J Vasc Surg. 2011 Dec;54(6 Suppl):18S-25S
pubmed: 21802243
Phlebology. 2014 Aug;29(7):461-70
pubmed: 23761876
J Vasc Surg. 2013 Jan;57(1):254-61
pubmed: 23182156