[Translation into French and republication of: "Central venous catheter associated upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients: Diagnosis and therapeutic management"]. / Traduction et republication de : « Thrombose veineuse profonde du membre supérieur associée à un cathéter veineux central chez les patients cancéreux : diagnostic et prise en charge thérapeutique ¼.

Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a relatively frequent and potentially fatal complication arising in patients with cancer who require a central catheter placement for intravenous treatment. In everyday practice, CRT remains a challenge for management; despite its frequency and its negative clinical impact, few data are available concerning diagnosis and treatment of CRT. In particular, no diagnostic studies or clinical trials have been published that included exclusively patients with cancer and a central venous catheter (CVC). For this reason, many questions regarding optimal management of CRT remain unanswered. Due to the paucity of high-grade evidence regarding CRT in cancer patients, guidelines are derived from upper extremity DVT studies for diagnosis, and from those for lower limb DVT for treatment. This article addresses the issues of diagnosis and management of CRT through a review of the available literature and makes a number of proposals based on the available evidence. In symptomatic patients, venous ultrasound is the most appropriate choice for first-line diagnostic imaging of CRT because it is noninvasive, and its diagnostic performance is high (which is not the case in asymptomatic patients). In the absence of direct comparative clinical trials, we suggest treating patients with CRT with a therapeutic dose of either a LMWH or a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor, with or without a loading dose. These anticoagulants should be given for a total of at least 3 months, including at least 1 month after catheter removal following initiation of therapy.

Outcomes following interval delayed first rib resection for acute axillosubclavian deep venous thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Current management of axillosubclavian deep venous thrombosis (DVT) often uses thrombolysis for the DVT, prompt first rib removal, and occasional venoplasty or stenting. Our institution has increasingly used anticoagulation alone followed by interval first rib resection. We sought to analyze the effectiveness of this simplified technique. METHODS: Between September 2012 and April 2021, 27 patients were identified within the institution's electronic medical record as having undergone first rib resection for upper extremity DVT. Seven of these patients had undergone preoperative thrombolysis before referral and were excluded. Among the remaining 20 patients, preoperative clinic charts were evaluated for age, venous segment involvement, contralateral limb involvement, presence of documented hypercoagulable state, duration of preoperative and postoperative anticoagulation, and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 20 patients (mean age, 26.2 years; 13 males) presenting with acute axillosubclavian DVT, all patients had right (n = 8) or left (n = 12) arm swelling. Five patients had extremity pain and four had extremity discoloration. Ten had axillosubclavian vein involvement, 9 had subclavian vein involvement, and 1 had axillary vein involvement. Two patients were on oral contraceptives and no patients had any other diagnosed hypercoagulable conditions. The mean duration of preoperative and postoperative anticoagulation was 3.2 ± 2.6 months and 2.1 ± 2.1 months, respectively. Nineteen patients underwent supraclavicular first rib resection and 1 patient underwent transaxillary resection. Twelve patients (60%) demonstrated complete DVT resolution by venous duplex examination during the postoperative period and 8 patients (40%) demonstrated partial recanalization/chronic DVT. Complications included one hemothorax and one thoracic duct injury. All 20 patients remain asymptomatic without arm swelling, with a mean follow-up of 55.1 ± 34.7 months. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients presenting with acute axillosubclavian DVT, anticoagulation alone followed by interval first rib resection proved to be successful in providing symptomatic relief in the short to medium term. By eliminating the need for preoperative thrombolysis and postoperative venograms, this potentially cost-saving algorithm simplifies our management for acute venous thoracic outlet syndrome while maintaining good clinical outcomes. Because this study only analyzed our management algorithm's effectiveness in the short to medium term, the long-term effectiveness of this treatment will need to be demonstrated.

Upper extremity venous thrombosis in hospitalized patients: A prospective epidemiological study.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of upper extremities vein thrombosis (UEVT) is rising with the increasing use of endovenous devices. These thromboses are particularly common among hospitalized patients. The epidemiology and risk factors for UEVT are poorly understood in a hospitalized population. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of UEVT in hospitalized patients and study thrombosis risk factors according to their location. METHODS: Prospective evaluation of patients hospitalized in a university hospital with clinical and Doppler ultrasound (DUS) assessment of the upper extremities. RESULTS: Of the 400 patients included, 91(22.8 %) had UEVT including 8 (8.8 %) proximal thrombosis, 32 (35.2 %) arm venous thrombosis and 51 (56.0 %) forearm venous thrombosis; 7 (7.7 %) patients with UEVT had a concomitant symptomatic pulmonary embolism. In this population of hospitalized patients, 40 (10 %) had proximal or arm thrombosis and 51 (12.8 %) forearm thrombosis. All patients with UEVT had a venous catheter and 63 (69.2 %) of UEVT patients had therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation at the time of DUS evaluation. In multivariate analysis, peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) OR 3.71 [1.90; 7.91] (p < 0.001); MID line OR 3.58 [1.46; 8.91] (p = 0.005) and infection disease OR 2.21 [1.26; 4386] (p = 0.005) were associated with UEVT. Central venous catheter OR 66.24 [12.64; 587.03] was associated with proximal UEVT and MID line OR 12.61 [4.64; 35.77] (p < 0.001) with arm UEVT. Forearm UEVT were associated with PIVCOR 10.71[3.14; 67.37] (p = 0.001); infectious disease OR 2.87 [1.48; 5.60] (p = 0.002), iron infusion OR 3.11 [1.23; 7.47] and hospitalization for postpartum OR 4.37 [0.97; 18.06] (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: One in 5 hospitalized patients suffers from UEVT. Proximal venous thrombosis is uncommon. The presence of a catheter and hospitalization for infection are the factors most frequently associated with UEVT.

Novel Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy Device for Treating Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis in Patient With Paget-Schroetter Syndrome.

Paget-Schroetter Syndrome (PSS) is a form of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) caused by the external compression of the subclavian vein at the thoracic outlet. Here we describe a complex PSS case in a 43-year-old female who experienced multiple recurrent DVTs and a right-sided hemothorax following two continuous aspiration thrombectomy procedures and a first rib resection. Rapid and complete symptom resolution was achieved with the InThrill Thrombectomy System (Inari Medical), a novel, thrombolytic-free, percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy device that removed all recurrent acute and subacute thrombus in a single session without significant blood loss.

Management of Paget-Schroetter Syndrome: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal management of Paget-Schroetter syndrome (PSS). The objective was to summarise the current evidence for management of PSS with explicit attention to the clinical outcomes of different management strategies. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched for reports published between January 1990 and December 2021. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. The primary endpoint was the proportion of symptom free patients at last follow up. Secondary outcomes were success of initial treatment, recurrence of thrombosis or persistent occlusion, and patency at last follow up. Meta-analyses of the primary endpoint were performed for non-comparative and comparative reports. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Sixty reports were included (2 653 patients), with overall moderate quality. The proportions of symptom free patients in non-comparative analysis were: anticoagulation (AC), 0.54; catheter directed thrombolysis (CDT) + AC, 0.71; AC + first rib resection (FRR), 0.80; and CDT + FRR, 0.96. Pooled analysis of comparative reports confirmed the superiority of CDT + FRR compared with AC (OR 13.89, 95% CI 1.08 - 179.04; p = .040, I2 87%, very low certainty of evidence), AC + FRR (OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.21 - 4.35; p = .010, I2 0%, very low certainty of evidence), and CDT + AC (OR 8.44, 95% CI 1.12 - 59.53; p = .030, I2 63%, very low certainty of evidence). Secondary endpoints were in favour of CDT + FRR. CONCLUSION: Non-operative management of PSS with AC alone results in persistent symptoms in 46% of patients, while 96% of patients managed with CDT + FFR were symptom free at end of follow up. Superiority of CDT + FRR compared with AC, CDT + AC, and AC + FRR was confirmed by meta-analysis. The overall quality of included reports was moderate, and the level of certainty was very low.

Single-center experience with catheter-directed thrombolysis and balloon angioplasty for acute upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis: a case series study.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatment of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) is crucial to prevent further complications. Various treatments, including percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (PMT), catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), decompression surgery, and venoplasty are suggested for UEDVT. However, no prospective study has yet favored any of these treatments. This study presents a review of our experience with CDT followed by balloon venoplasty in patients with acute primary UEDVT. METHODS: We enrolled all patients diagnosed with acute UEDVT from January 2020 to June 2021. Subjects with UEDVT due to secondary causes like malignancies, indwelling catheters, or leads were excluded. CDT was performed through brachial vein access, using a perfusion catheter, and rt-PA administration. Balloon venoplasty was performed if the treated segment had remaining stenosis after CDT. Patients were followed up at the vein clinic for any signs and symptoms in the upper extremity and lifestyle changes. Follow-up ultrasonography was done 12 months after discharge. RESULTS: Twelve patients with a mean age of 41.08 ± 14.0 years were included in the study. The mean duration of CDT was 25.00 ± 10.56 h. After CDT, all patients had remaining occlusions, with seven having more than 50% remaining stenosis. However, after balloon venoplasty, no patient had significant (more than 50%) stenosis. There was no serious complication after both procedures. Patients were followed up for a mean duration of twelve months after their admission, with a mean time of maintenance anticoagulation was 10.73 ± 5.77 months. Only one patient had recurrent symptoms in his target limb which required a decompression surgery, while the rest were free of symptoms in their treated extremity. No subject developed pulmonary emboli (PE) during admission or the follow-up period. There was no evidence of hospital readmission for any reason. Upper extremity color-doppler sonography of the patients at twelve months after their procedure showed normal venous flow without any significant stenosis in 8 (66.7%), and partially normal flow with patent target vein in 4 (33.3%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: CDT followed by balloon venoplasty may be an effective treatment for selected patients with acute primary UEDVT, providing desirable long-term results and potentially avoiding the need for decompression surgery in the short or long term.

Results of a Flexible Patient-Centered Approach to the Timing of Thoracic Outlet Decompression in Paget Schroetter Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Treatment algorithms for subclavian vein (SCV) effort thrombosis (Paget-Schroetter syndrome- PSS) are multiple, ranging from thrombolysis (TL) with immediate or delayed thoracic outlet decompression (TOD) to conservative treatment with anticoagulation alone. We follow a regimen of TL/pharmacomechanical thrombectomy (PMT) followed by TOD with first rib resection, scalenectomy, venolysis, and selective venoplasty (open or endovascular) performed electively at a time convenient for the patient. Oral anticoagulants are prescribed for 3 months or longer based upon response. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of this flexible protocol. METHODS: Clinical and procedural details of consecutive patients treated for PSS from January 2001 to August 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Endpoints included success of TL and eventual clinical outcome. Patients were divided into 2 groups-Group I: TL/PMT + TOD; Group II: medical management/anticoagulation + TOD. RESULTS: PSS was diagnosed in 114 patients; 104 (62 female, mean age 31 years) who underwent TOD were included in the study. Group I: 53 patients underwent TOD after initial TL/PMT (23 at our institution and 30 elsewhere) with success (acute thrombus resolution) in 80% (n = 20) and 72% (n = 24) respectively. Adjunctive balloon-catheter venoplasty was performed in 67%. TL failed to recanalize the occluded SCV in 11% (n = 6). Complete thrombus resolution was seen in 9% (n = 5). Residual chronic thrombus in 79% (n = 42) resulted in median SCV stenosis of 50% (range 10% to 80%). With continued anticoagulation, further thrombus retraction was noted with median 40% improvement in stenosis including in veins with unsuccessful TL. TOD was performed at a median of 1.5 months (range 2-8 months). Rethrombosis of the SCV occurred in 3 patients 1-3 days postoperatively and was managed with MT/SCV stenting/balloon angioplasty and anticoagulation. Symptomatic relief was achieved in 49/53 (92%) patients at a median follow-up of 14 months. Group II: 51 patients underwent TOD following medical treatment elsewhere with anticoagulation alone for an average 6 months (range 2-18 months) with recurrent SCV thrombosis in 5 (11%). Thirty-nine patients (76%) had persistent symptoms; the remaining had asymptomatic compression of the SCV with maneuvers. SCV occlusion persisted in 4 patients (7%); the indication for TOD being residual symptoms from compression of collateral veins, the median residual stenosis was 70% (range 30-90%). TOD was performed at a median of 6 months after diagnosis of PSS. Open venous reconstruction with endovenectomy and patch was performed in 4 patients and stenting in 2. Symptomatic relief was achieved in 46/51 (90%) at a median follow-up of 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: For Paget Schroetter syndrome a management protocol encompassing elective thoracic outlet decompression at a convenient time following thrombolysis is safe and effective, with low risk of rethrombosis. Continued anticoagulation in the interim results in further recanalization of the subclavian vein and may reduce the need for open venous reconstruction.

Acute Myocardial Infarction, Subclavian Vein Thrombosis, and Pulmonary Embolism Secondary to COVID-19-A Case Report.

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The majority of infected patients develop the clinical picture of a respiratory disease, although some may develop various complications, such as arterial or venous thrombosis. The clinical case presented herein is a rare example of sequential development and combination of acute myocardial infarction, subclavian vein thrombosis (Paget Schroetter syndrome), and pulmonary embolism in the same patient after COVID-19. Case presentation: A 57-year-old man with a 10-day history of a SARS-CoV-2 infection was hospitalized with a clinical, electrocardiographic, and laboratory constellation of an acute inferior-lateral myocardial infarction. He was treated invasively and had one stent implanted. Three days after implantation, the patient developed shortness of breath and palpitation on the background of a swollen and painful right hand. The signs of acute right-sided heart strain observed on the electrocardiogram and the elevated D-dimer levels strongly suggested pulmonary embolism. A Doppler ultrasound and invasive evaluation demonstrated thrombosis of the right subclavian vein. The patient was administered pharmacomechanical and systemic thrombolysis and heparin infusion. Revascularization was achieved 24 h later via successful balloon dilatation of the occluded vessel. Conclusion: Thrombotic complications of COVID-19 can develop in a significant proportion of patients. Concomitant manifestation of these complications in the same patient is extremely rare, presenting at the same time, quite a therapeutic challenge to clinicians due to the need for invasive techniques and simultaneous administration of dual antiaggregant therapy combined with an anticoagulant treatment. Such a combined treatment increases the hemorrhagic risk and requires a serious accumulation of data for the purpose of a long-term antithrombotic prophylaxis in patients with such pathology.

Post-thrombotic syndrome after upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: An international Delphi consensus study.

OBJECTIVES: Primary 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. METHODS: An 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. RESULTS: After 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. CONCLUSION: Consensus 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.

Optimal management of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: Is venous thoracic outlet syndrome underrecognized?

BACKGROUND: Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) accounts for ~10% of all cases of DVT. In the most widely referenced general review of DVT, the American Academy of Chest Physicians essentially recommended that UEDVT be treated identically to that of lower extremity DVT, with anticoagulation the default therapy. However, the medical literature has not differentiated well between DVT in the arm vs DVT in the leg and has not emphasized the effects of the costoclavicular junction and the lack of the effect of gravity to the point at which UEDVT due to extrinsic bony compression at the costoclavicular junction is classified as "primary." METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature review, beginning with both Medline and Google Scholar searches, in addition to collected references. Next, we manually reviewed the relevant citations within the initial reports studied. Both surgical and medical journals were explored. RESULTS: It has been proposed that "effort thrombosis" should be classified as a secondary cause of UEDVT, limiting the definition of "primary" to that which is truly idiopathic. Other causes of secondary UEDVT include catheter- and pacemaker-related thrombosis (the most common cause but often asymptomatic), thrombosis related to malignancy and hypercoagulable conditions, and the rare case of thrombosis due to compression of the vein by a focal malignancy or other space-occupying lesion. In true primary UEDVT and those secondary cases in which no mechanical cause is present or can be corrected, anticoagulation remains the treatment of choice, usually for 3 months or the duration of a needed catheter. However, evidence has suggested that many cases of effort thrombosis are likely missed by a too-narrow adherence to this protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Because proper treatment of effort thrombosis would decrease the long-term symptomatic status rate from 50% to almost 0% and because these are healthy patients with a long lifespan, we believe that a more aggressive attitude toward thrombolysis should be followed for any patient with a reasonable degree of suspicion for venous thoracic outlet syndrome.

Upper extremity deep venous thrombosis prevalence in the NHS Grampian Medical Ambulatory clinic: diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic considerations in oncology patients.

INTRODUCTION: Whilst upper extremity deep vein thromboses (UEDVT) account for approximately 5 to 10% of all cases of DVT, rigorous guidelines regarding diagnosis and management of presenting patients remain to be developed. The association of UEDVT with concurrent asymptomatic pulmonary embolism as well as the first presentation of malignancy deems essential rigorous research and clinical guideline development to ensure optimal patient care. METHODS: This retrospective audit study is the first to provide estimates of UEDVT prevalence in the North-East Deanery main hospital centre, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary (ARI). RESULTS: Of the 605 patients attending the ARI Ambulatory Emergency Care (AEC) clinic with clinical suspicion of UEDVT, 38 (6.2%) had a confirmatory diagnosis. Underlying malignancy, presence of PICC line, and cardiovascular co-morbidities were identified as common confounding factors. Subclavian vein with concurrent extension to primarily the cephalic vein thrombosis was identified as the most commonly thrombosed venous territories. Importantly, oncology patients were found to have poorer survival outcomes following an UEDVT, in comparison to patients with other significant co-morbidities (cardiovascular, chronic renal disease, inflammatory bowel disease): HR 5.814 (95%CI 1.15, 29.25), p 0.012. Lastly, genetic associations were drawn between patient genetic status as tested for other co-morbidities and prothrombotic cellular cascades, suggesting rigorous VTE assessment in patients identified with congenital or acquired mutations, namely, in CALR, JAK, MSH 2/6, MYC, and FXN. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study offers the first report of UEDVT presentations in the UK with no restrictions of patient performance status or underlying co-morbidities and provides a rounded clinical picture of patient characteristics, diagnosis, management, and prognostic associations in view of rigorous guideline development.

Comparison of aspiration thrombectomy to other endovascular therapies for proximal upper extremity deep venous thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) provides an effective method for clearing deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Unfortunately, CDT is associated with hemorrhagic complications. This study evaluated the technical success of the various endovascular therapies including a new mechanical aspiration thrombectomy (AT) device for the treatment of acute upper extremity DVT (UEDVT). METHODS: This single-center retrospective review included patients with acute symptomatic proximal UEDVT secondary to venous thoracic outlet syndrome. Undergoing endovascular therapy from December 2013 to June 2019. Patients were treated with a variety of methods including CDT, ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis (USAT), rheolytic thrombectomy, and AT. We evaluated outcomes for patients undergoing AT compared with nonaspiration thrombectomy (NAT) techniques. The primary outcome was technical success, defined as resolution of more than 70% of the thrombus. The secondary end point was the ability to complete the therapy in a single session. RESULTS: There were 22 patients who had endovascular management of their symptomatic proximal UEDVT. All 22 patients (100%) were successfully treated with more than a 70% thrombus resolution. Ten patients underwent AT, of which 50% (5/10) had single session therapies. Twelve patients underwent NAT (three had CDT or USAT alone; three had USAT with rheolytic thrombectomy; and six had CDT followed by rheolytic thrombectomy), with single session therapy occurring in only 8.3% of the NAT group (1/12). The average total dose of thrombolytics was 12.6 ± 9.65 mg in the AT group compared with 19.0 ± 5.78 mg in the NAT group (mean difference, -6.4; 95% confidence interval, -1.1 to 13.9). All but one of the patients in the AT group went on to have successful first rib resections. All NAT patients had successful first rib resections. A venogram was not performed at the time of decompression. All patients except one underwent resection via the infraclavicular approach, with rib removal posterior to the brachial plexus, a median of 8.0 (interquartile range, 6.0-12.0) days after DVT therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a technical success rate of 100% was achieved for acute symptomatic proximal UEDVT therapies. AT technology allows for higher rates of treatment in a single session, thereby minimizing a patient's risks of bleeding complications. More research is needed to further define the role of this new technology in the treatment paradigm of UEDVT management.

Prevalence and clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: Upper extremity (UE) deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a common and increasing complication in hospitalized patients. The objective of the present study was to determine the prevalence, treatment strategies, complications, and outcomes of UE-DVT. METHODS: We performed a retrospective single-institution study of patients with a diagnosis of UE-DVT from January 2016 through February 2018 (26 months). Patients aged ≥18 years who had been admitted to the hospital and who had had positive UE duplex ultrasound findings for acute UE-DVT were included in the present study. The outcomes were in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, pulmonary embolism (PE), and recurrent UE-DVT. RESULTS: Among 63,045 patients admitted to the hospital, 1000 (1.6%) had been diagnosed with UE-DVT. Of 3695 UE venous duplex ultrasound examinations performed during the study period, almost one third (27.0%) were positive for acute UE-DVT. The mean age was 55.0 ± 17.2 years, and most patients were men (58.3%), white (49.2%), and overweight (mean body mass index, 29.4 ± 10.3 kg/m2). The most affected vein was the right internal jugular vein (54.8%). Most of the patients (96.9%) has been receiving venous thromboembolism prophylaxis or anticoagulation therapy at the diagnosis. Most patients (77.8%) had had an intravenous device (IVD) in place at the diagnosis. Most of the patients (84.4%) were treated with anticoagulation therapy in the hospital but only one half (54.5%) were discharged with anticoagulation therapy. In-hospital mortality was 12.1% unrelated to UE-DVT, major bleeding occurred in 47.6% of the patients during hospitalization (fatal bleeding, 1%), PE was diagnosed in 4.8% of the patients, and 0.7% were fatal. Recurrent UE-DVT occurred in 6.1% of the patients. On multivariable analysis, the risk of death was increased by older age, cancer, intensive care unit admission, concomitant lower extremity DVT, and bleeding before the UE-DVT diagnosis. The presence of an IVD increased the risk of PE and the risk of recurrent UE-DVT. The risk of major bleeding was increased by the presence of an IVD, female sex, and concomitant lower extremity DVT. CONCLUSIONS: UE-DVT is a common complication in hospitalized patients (1.6%). Consequent acute PE and recurrent DVT remain important complications, as does bleeding. It is unclear whether standard thromboprophylaxis effectively protects against UE-DVT. More studies dedicated to UE-DVT are required to provide appropriate guidance on prophylaxis and treatment.

Venous thoracic outlet syndrome and Paget-Schroetter syndrome.

Venous thoracic outlet syndrome represents a relatively rare but important diagnosis in the adolescent population with increasing recognition. Compression of the subclavian vein within the costoclavicular space can lead to episodic venous outlet obstruction in the upper extremity, with edema, rubor and functional symptoms. Over time, cumulative injury and compression can lead to thrombosis of the vein, referred to as "effort thrombosis" or the Paget-Schroetter syndrome. This progression can lead to the need for acute management of the venous thromboembolism, requirement for thoracic outlet decompression surgery and the potential for long-term sequelae such as post-thrombotic syndrome. Management is focused on clot minimization, anticoagulation during the period of endothelial injury and inflammation and surgical decompression via first rib resection, anterior scalenectomy and venolysis to remove external compression of the vein. This manuscript reviews the diagnosis, evaluation and treatment of venous thoracic outlet syndrome and Paget-Schroetter syndrome.

Primary upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (effort thrombosis).

Primary spontaneous upper extremity deep vein thrombosis is characterised by thrombosis within deep veins draining the upper extremity due to anatomical abnormalities of the thoracic outlet causing axillosubclavian compression and subsequent thrombosis. It is an uncommon condition that typically presents with unilateral arm swelling in a young male following vigorous upper extremity activity. The diagnosis of this condition is usually made by Doppler ultrasound, but other investigations are mandatory to exclude the secondary causes of upper extremity DVT. Different treatment options are available including anticoagulation, thrombolysis, and surgery. We report the case of a young healthy male with athletic physique who presented with pain and swelling of his dominant arm after weightlifting in the gym.

Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: Current Knowledge and Future Directions.

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) has been increasing in incidence due to the escalating use of central venous catheters such as peripherally inserted central catheters. UEDVT can be primary idiopathic or secondary to pacemaker leads, intravascular catheters or cancer. In comparison to conventional venous thromboembolism such as lower limb deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism the risk factors, investigations, and management are not well defined. We review current evidence in primary and secondary UEDVT, highlighting areas in need of further research. We also explore the entity of venous thoracic outlet syndrome, which is said to be a risk factor for recurrent primary UEDVT and is the rationale behind surgical interventions.

Management of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis: an updated review of the literature.

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) represents about 5-10% of all cases of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) with a steadily increasing incidence mostly due to the high prevalence of cancer and frequent use of intravascular devices such as central venous catheters and pacemaker. In primary UEDVT, the venous outflow obstruction and subsequent thrombosis are related to congenital or acquired anatomical abnormalities, whereas secondary UEDVT is often associated with malignancy or indwelling lines. A considerable proportion of patients with UEDVT develops serious complications such as recurrent thrombosis, post-thrombotic syndrome, and pulmonary embolism, therefore timely diagnosis and adequate treatment are of crucial importance. Despite sharing many similarities with lower extremity DVT, UEDVT has distinctive features requiring specific diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. The present review discusses the latest evidence on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of UEDVT, and provides management indications which may help guide clinical decision making.

Paget-Schroetter Syndrome in a Young Female.

Paget-Schroetter syndrome or effort thrombosis is a relatively rare primary spontaneous thrombosis of upper extremity deep veins secondary to entrapment of axillary subclavian veins from an abnormality of the thoracic outlet. It is commonly seen in young adults who lift heavy weights or strenuous use of the upper extremities during athletic activities. Repetitive microtrauma to the subclavian vein secondary to narrow costoclavicular space and strenuous activities leads to intimal layer inflammation, hypertrophy, fibrosis, and coagulation cascade activation. Management of Paget-Schroetter syndrome differs from the venous thrombosis of the lower extremity as treatment includes anticoagulation, thrombolysis, and surgical decompression. Early recognition and timely management are required to prevent significant disability from post-thrombotic syndrome and long-term morbidity from recurrent thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism. Internists and emergency physicians should be aware of the disease's presentation, treatment options, and early referral to vascular surgeons since prompt initiation of appropriate treatment will have better outcomes than delayed treatment. We discussed a case of a 31-year-old female who lifts heavyweight at work, presented with right arm swelling and pain for 2 weeks, and diagnosed with axillary subclavian vein thrombosis secondary to thoracic outlet obstruction. She received a high-dose heparin drip followed by catheter-directed thrombolysis and underwent surgical decompression of axillary subclavian vein via resection of the first rib, subclavius muscle resection, partial anterior scalenectomy, and venolysis. In our review of the literature, randomized controlled studies lack the efficacy and safety of surgical decompression. However, the results are promising based on accumulated experience from vascular surgery experts and small case series. Extensive studies are needed further to delineate the protocol for the management of Paget-Schroetter syndrome.

A systematic review and meta-analysis for the management of Paget-Schroetter syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: There is currently no general agreement on the optimal treatment of Paget-Schroetter syndrome. Most centers have advocated an interventional approach that is based on the results of small institutional series. The purpose of our meta-analysis was to focus on the safety and efficacy of thrombolysis or anticoagulation with decompression therapy. A detailed description of the epidemiologic, etiologic, and clinical characteristics, along with radiologic findings and treatment option details, was also performed. METHODS: The current meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting on spontaneous thrombosis or thrombosis after strenuous activities of axillary-subclavian vein were considered eligible. Analyses of all retrospective studies were conducted, and pooled proportions with 95% confidence intervals of outcome rates were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies with 1511 patients were identified. Among these patients, 1177 (77.9%) had thrombolysis, 658 (43.5%) had anticoagulation, and 1293 (85.6%) patients had decompression therapy of the thoracic outlet. Complete thrombus resolution was estimated at 78.11% of the patients after thrombolysis, and the respective pooled proportion for partial resolution of thrombus was 23.72%. Despite thrombolytic therapy, 212 patients underwent additional balloon angioplasty for residual stenosis, although only 36 stents were implanted. After anticoagulation, a total of 40.70% of the patients had complete thrombus resolution, whereas partial resolution was occurred in 29.13% of the patients. During follow-up, a total of 51.75% of the patients with any initial treatment modality had no remaining thrombus, and 84.87% of these patients were free of symptoms. We also estimated that 76.88% of the patients had a Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score of <20, indicating no or mild symptoms after treatment. A subgroup meta-analysis with 20 studies and 1309 patients, showed significantly improved vein patency and symptom resolution in patients who had first rib resection with or without venoplasty, compared with those who had only thrombolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although no randomized controlled data are available, our analysis strongly suggested higher rates of thrombus and symptoms resolution with thrombolysis, followed by first rib resection. A prospective randomized trial comparing anticoagulants with thrombolysis and decompression of thoracic outlet is required.