Epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and management of superficial-vein thrombosis of the legs.

Recent data on lower-limb superficial-vein thrombosis (SVT) may substantially impact its clinical management. Particularly, the clear confirmation that SVT is closely linked to deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) highlights the potential severity of the disease. DVT or PE is diagnosed in 20-30% of SVT patients. Moreover, clinically relevant symptomatic thromboembolic events complicate isolated SVT (without concomitant DVT or PE at diagnosis) in 4-8% of patients. For the first time, an anticoagulant treatment, once-daily 2.5 mg fondaparinux for 45 days, was demonstrated to be effective and safe for preventing these symptomatic thromboembolic events in patients with lower-limb isolated SVT in the randomized, placebo-controlled CALISTO study. More recent data from another randomized trial support these findings. New recommendations on the management of SVT patients, including complete ultrasonography examination of the legs and, in patients with isolated SVT, prescription of once-daily 2.5 mg fondaparinux subcutaneously for 45 days on top of symptomatic treatments, may be proposed, wherever the cost of fondaparinux is acceptable. Superficial-vein thrombosis (SVT) of the lower limbs has long been regarded as a benign, self-limiting disease, expected to resolve spontaneously and rapidly, and requiring only symptomatic treatments [1,2]. However, the perception of this disease is now changing with the recent publication of data indicating its potential severity [3] and showing for the first time the benefit of a therapeutic strategy based on the administration of an anticoagulant treatment [4]. The overall management of this frequent disease therefore needs to be reconsidered.

Primary angioplasty is cost-minimizing compared with pre-hospital thrombolysis for patients within 60 min of a percutaneous coronary intervention center: the Comparison of Angioplasty and Pre-hospital Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAPTIM) cost-efficacy sub-study.

OBJECTIVES: This ancillary study of the Comparison of Angioplasty and Pre-hospital Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAPTIM) trial sought to assess the cost-efficacy ratio of primary coronary angioplasty (PCA) and pre-hospital thrombolysis (PHT) in patients suffering from an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (<6 h) close to (<60 min journey) a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) center. BACKGROUND: In the CAPTIM study, at 30 days follow-up PCA was as equally effective as PHT with rescue angioplasty if needed. The cost efficacy of these two strategies has not yet been compared. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected for 299 patients in three centers. The efficacy analysis was extended at one-year follow-up for those patients. Direct fixed and variable actual costs were assessed with a piggyback data collection. RESULTS: The one-year primary end point event-rate (death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke) was not different after PCA or PHT (14% vs. 16. 4%, p = NS). Costs were lower in the PCA group either during the in-hospital period (8,287 vs. 9,170 $, p = 0.0001) and after one-year follow-up, in relation to a higher rate of subsequent revascularizations in the PHT group (49% vs. 23%, p < 0. 01), leading to a longer hospital stay (10 vs. 9.1 days, p = 0. 03). CONCLUSIONS: After AMI in patients less than 1 h from a PCI center, PCA is as effective and less costly than a combined strategy of PHT followed by rescue angioplasty.

The assessment of deep vein thromboses for therapeutic trials.

In the current paper, we provide recommendations for the assessment of deep vein thromboses for the purpose of therapeutic trials evaluating antithrombotic drugs in the prevention of deep venous thrombosis. We have reviewed recently published articles on diagnostic and therapeutic studies, and we have evaluated methods of assessments. Ascending venography has been considered as the reference test for the confirmation of DVT. A roentgenographic image is subsequently available for review and allows classification by blinded, objective observers. However, venography poses substantial clinical and methodological limitations, particularly in the setting of systematic screening for all patients enrolled in a randomized clinical trial. Compression ultrasonography may replace venography for systematic screening of DVT in clinical trials, provided that specific methodological details are specified in the protocol and are fulfilled to ensure high and comparable sensitivity and specificity from all participating centers. This non-invasive technique has virtually no contraindications, and therefore more patients can be enrolled and evaluated. Furthermore, the compression ultrasonograph can be videotaped for central reading. Compression ultrasonography has already been adopted as the principal method for evaluating DVT in several ongoing large scale prevention trials with the approval of major drug agencies.