25 mm Hg versus 35 mm Hg elastic compression stockings to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome after deep vein thrombosis (CELEST): a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal strength of compression needed to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after a proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is debated. We aimed to assess whether 25 mm Hg elastic compression stockings (ECS) are non-inferior to 35 mm Hg ECS in preventing PTS after a DVT. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial, we enrolled adults (≥18 years) with a first ipsilateral proximal DVT attending 46 French vascular medicine hospital departments or private practices. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre, age, and sex; with varying block sizes of two and four) to wear 25 mm Hg or 35 mm Hg ECS for 2 years. The primary outcome was the cumulative rate of PTS 2 years after inclusion, defined by a Villalta scale (≥5). Efficacy was assessed by intention-to-treat and in eligible participants who had complete primary outcome data. A per-protocol analysis was also conducted among compliant patients as a secondary outcome measure. Safety was assessed in all participants who used ECS at least once, and for which we have at least some tolerance information during follow-up. The margin for non-inferiority was 12·5%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01578122, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between June 28, 2012, and July 21, 2017, we enrolled 341 eligible participants who consented to randomisation. 233 (68%) were men and median age was 59 years (IQR 45-70). Collection of ethnicity and race as a routine research variable is not authorised in France. Median follow-up was 735 days (IQR 721-760). 249 (73%) had complete data at 2 years. For the primary analysis, 40 (31%) of 129 participants with complete data in the 25 mm Hg ECS group and 40 (33%) of 120 in the 35 mm Hg group had PTS (absolute difference -2·3% [90% CI -12·1 to 7·4], pnon-inferiority=0·0062; relative risk 0·93, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·33). Results remained similar after imputation of missing data in patients we were authorised to do so: the cumulative proportion of PTS was 45 (29%) of 154 in the 25 mm Hg ECS group versus 52 (35%) of 148 in the 35 mm Hg ECS group (relative risk 0·83, 95% CI 0·60 to 1·16). Absolute difference was -5·9%, (90% CI -14·7 to 2·9), p=0·0003 for non-inferiority. Adherence was optimal (>80% and modified GIRERD score of 0-2) for 75 (51%) of 146 patients assigned to 25 mm Hg ECS and for 56 (42%) of 134 patients assigned to 35 mm Hg ECS (p=0·11). Regarding major adverse events related to ECS, there were no between-group differences in rates of deep vein thrombosis (0 vs 1 [0·6%]), ipsilateral leg ulcer (0 vs 1 [0·6%]), infection (0 vs 0), or death (0 vs 0) between the 169 patients evaluated in the 25 mm Hg ECS group and the 159 patients in the 35 mm Hg ECS group. Two (1%) of 328 patients who ever wore ESC developed ECS-related serious adverse events, one distal DVT and one leg ulcer (both in the 35 mm Hg ECS group). In the 25 mm Hg group, 6 patients died, 14 had a venous thromboembolic recurrence (proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism), and 7 had a major bleed. In the 35 mm Hg group, 5 patients died, 10 had a venous thromboembolic recurrence (proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism), and 6 had a major bleed. INTERPRETATION: Although we did not reach the prespecified sample size, our results suggest that 25 mm Hg ECS are non-inferior to 35 mm Hg ECS in preventing PTS. Larger more powerful studies are needed. FUNDING: Laboratoires Innothera, France.

Long-term risk of postthrombotic syndrome after symptomatic distal deep vein thrombosis: The CACTUS-PTS study.

BACKGROUND: After a proximal lower limb deep vein thrombosis (DVT; involving popliteal veins or above), up to 40% of patients develop postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) as assessed by the Villalta scale (VS). Poor initial anticoagulant treatment is a known risk factor for PTS. The risk of developing PTS after isolated distal DVT (infra-popliteal DVT without pulmonary embolism), and the impact of anticoagulant treatment on this risk, are uncertain. METHODS: Long-term follow-up of CACTUS double-blind trial comparing 6 weeks of s.c. nadroparin (171 IU/kg/d) versus s.c. placebo for a first symptomatic isolated distal DVT. At least 1 year after randomization, patients had a PTS assessment in clinic or by phone using the VS. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 6 years, PTS was present in 30% (n = 54) of the 178 patients who had a PTS assessment. PTS was moderate or severe in 24% (n = 13) of cases. There was no statistically significant difference in prevalence of PTS in the nadroparin versus placebo groups (29% versus 32%, P = .6), except in patients without evidence of primary chronic venous insufficiency (9% versus 24%, P = .04). Rates of venous thromboembolism recurrence during follow-up in the nadroparin and placebo groups were, respectively, 8% (n = 7) and 14% (n = 13; P = .2). CONCLUSION: After a first isolated distal DVT, the risk of PTS is substantial but much lower than that reported after proximal DVT. Anticoagulation with nadroparin doesn't provide any clear benefit to prevent PTS, except in patients without preexisting chronic venous insufficiency. Anticoagulation might be associated with a lower risk of venous thromboembolism recurrence.

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

BACKGROUND: The 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. METHODS: In 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. FINDINGS: Between 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. INTERPRETATION: Nadroparin 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. FUNDING: Swiss National Science Foundation, the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique in France, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Superficial venous thrombosis and compression ultrasound imaging.

BACKGROUND: A current debate concerning suspected superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) focuses on the need of performing a compression ultrasound (CUS) exploration for confirming the diagnosis of SVT. This study was conducted to determine the clinical relevance and optimal CUS exploration in patients with symptomatic SVT. METHODS: We analyzed the characteristics of SVT and concomitant deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients included in the Prospective Observational Superficial Thrombophlebitis (POST) multicenter, observational prospective study. All patients underwent complete bilateral lower limb CUS, exploring both the superficial and deep venous systems. RESULTS: A total of 844 patients with clinical symptoms of SVT were recruited, of which 99 isolated SVTs (21.4%) had saphenofemoral/popliteal junction involvement, and 198 (23.5%) had a concomitant DVT, with 41.8% of them proximal DVTs. In 83 patients (41.9%), DVT and SVT were not contiguous. Five of 639 patients (1%) had an isolated contralateral DVT (ie, not bilateral). Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-3.4), inpatient status (OR, 5.4; 95% CI, 3.4-8.7), a personal history of DVT or pulmonary embolism (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.8), and SVT on nonvaricose veins (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 2.1-5.0) were significantly and independently associated with an increased risk of concomitant DVT. Half of the patients exhibited none of these risk factors, and the prevalence of concomitant DVT dropped to 11%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with symptomatic SVT, a CUS exploration screening the whole venous system of the affected limb is useful because it provides information that has important consequences for the management of these patients.

Superficial venous thrombosis and venous thromboembolism: a large, prospective epidemiologic study.

BACKGROUND: Superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) is perceived to have a benign prognosis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of venous thromboembolism in patients with SVT and to determine the 3-month incidence of thromboembolic complications. DESIGN: National cross-sectional and prospective epidemiologic cohort study. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00818688) SETTING: French office- and hospital-based vascular medicine specialists. PATIENTS: 844 consecutive patients with symptomatic SVT of the lower limbs that was at least 5 cm on compression ultrasonography. MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of venous thromboembolism and extension or recurrence of SVT in patients with isolated SVT at presentation. RESULTS: Among 844 patients with SVT at inclusion (median age, 65 years; 547 women), 210 (24.9%) also had deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Among 600 patients without DVT or pulmonary embolism at inclusion who were eligible for 3-month follow-up, 58 (10.2%) developed thromboembolic complications at 3 months (pulmonary embolism, 3 [0.5%]; DVT, 15 [2.8%]; extension of SVT, 18 [3.3%]; and recurrence of SVT, 10 [1.9%]), despite 540 patients (90.5%) having received anticoagulants. Risk factors for complications at 3 months were male sex, history of DVT or pulmonary embolism, previous cancer, and absence of varicose veins. LIMITATION: The findings are from a specialist referral setting, and the study was terminated before the target patient population was reached because of slow recruitment. CONCLUSION: A substantial number of patients with SVT exhibit venous thromboembolism at presentation, and some that do not can develop this complication in the subsequent 3 months. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: GlaxoSmithKline, sanofi-aventis, and the Ministère Francais de la Santé et des Sports (Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique).