Midterm outcomes in patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes and the necessity for anticoagulation in patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UE DVT) are unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of UE DVT, the outcomes of patients stratified by anticoagulation treatment, and which factors were significantly associated with mortality. METHODS: This study was a single-center, retrospective review of all patients undergoing UE venous duplex imaging in 2016. Information on patients' demographics, relevant comorbidities, use of anticoagulation at the time of diagnosis, characteristics of the UE DVT, treatment regimen(s), and outcomes was collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive and univariate statistics; multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify which of the aforementioned covariates are significantly associated with mortality rates at 30 days and 6 months, respectively, at a 95% confidence level. RESULTS: Of the 911 patients undergoing UE venous duplex imaging, 182 (20.0%) were positive for UE DVT. Within the first 30 days, 30 patients (16.5%) died, 13 (7.1%) had pulmonary emboli, 42 (23.1%) had either pulmonary emboli or died, and 3 (1.6%) had ischemic strokes. Within the first 6 months, 50 patients (27.5%) died. The mortality rate at 30 days was found to be significantly increased in patients who were older (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; P < .01), had high-risk contraindications to anticoagulation (OR, 5.14; P < .01), were on dialysis (OR, 3.03; P = .04), had centrally located UE DVTs (OR, 2.72; P < .05), and had a stroke (OR, 20.34; P = .03). Mortality was significantly decreased in patients who were treated with anticoagulation (OR, 0.16; P < .05). At 6 months, however, age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; P < .001), male sex (HR, 2.16; P = .02), dialysis (HR, 2.90; P = .01), high-risk contraindications to anticoagulation (HR, 2.67; P = .02), UE DVTs in both central and peripheral veins (HR, 4.55; P = .03), and ischemic stroke in the first 30 days (HR, 71.63; P < .001) were associated with significant increases in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that mortality rates among patients with UE DVT are relatively high and that treatment with anticoagulation is associated with a decrease in mortality at 30 days. Mortality was also associated with multiple comorbid conditions and demographics and not necessarily venous thromboembolism.

High Prevalence and Mortality Associated with Upper Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis in Hospitalized Patients at a Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND: Upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (UEDVT) and its associated complications are increasing in incidence, but management strategies are largely derived from experience treating lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LEDVT). The purpose of this study is to examine our single institution's experience with in-hospital venous thromboembolism (VTE), specifically the characteristics and outcomes of the UEDVT population as it compares to LEDVT. METHODS: This is a single tertiary care center retrospective cohort study of all consecutive inpatients diagnosed with acute VTE from June 2015 to December 2015. During this period, 4,495 patients underwent venous duplex examination (622 UE and 3,873 LE), identifying 83 inpatient DVTs. Chronic DVT and those diagnosed in the outpatient population were excluded. DVTs were classified as either provoked or unprovoked. Provoked DVT were defined as the presence of any of the following factors within 30 days prior to diagnosis: major surgery, immobilization (greater than 3 days of bedrest), trauma, infection requiring antibiotics, central venous access, pregnancy, and/or hormonal medication use. Inpatient pulmonary embolisms (PE) detected on chest computed tomography (CT) were also evaluated during this time frame. Patient data were collected, including age, gender, race, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, VTE risk factors, symptomatology at presentation, management including anticoagulation choice and filter placement if applicable, as well as discharge disposition. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 8.0 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, California), and a threshold P-value of <0.05 set for significance. RESULTS: During the study period, 83 DVTs (48 LEDVT, 35 UEDVT) and 24 PE were identified in 96 inpatients. Of these DVTs, 77.1% of these were defined as provoked. Eleven patients had simultaneous DVT and PE, and thirteen patients had PE with presumed occult pelvic or LEDVT. UEDVT patients had a higher proportion of comorbidities than LEDVT patients: coronary artery disease (25.7% vs. 13.1%, P = 0.16), congestive heart failure (20% vs. 6.6%, P = 0.09), as well as a trend toward higher incidence of malignancy (60% vs. 42.6%, P = 0.13). Of provoked VTE, UEDVT correlated more significantly with central venous catheters (88.4% vs. 12.5%, P=<0.0001), but was less commonly associated with prolonged bed rest (19.2% vs. 39.5%, P = 0.11). PE was diagnosed in 24/96 (25%) of the study population. Patients with LEDVT were found to have a significantly higher incidence of PE compared to those with UEDVT (34.4% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.006). Same-admission mortality for patients with VTE was 13/96 (13.5%). Of these, patients with UEDVT had significantly higher all-cause mortality than patients with LEDVT (28.5% vs. 4.9%, P = 0.004). When catheter-related UEDVT was excluded, there remained a significant difference in mortality between non-catheter-related UEDVT and LEDVT (33.3% vs. 4.9% P = 0.0119). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a high prevalence of UEDVT in hospitalized patients who experience VTE. Despite a lower incidence of synchronous PE, patients with UEDVT had a higher prevalence of significant medical comorbidities and higher all-cause mortality on the index hospital admission.

Central venous catheter-related thrombosis in intensive care patients - incidence and risk factors: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: One of the complications associated with central venous catheter (CVC) placement is catheter related deep vein thrombosis (CR-DVT). However a literature search revealed little evidence of this recognised complication. The primary aim of this study was to establish the incidence rate and risk factors for the development of CR-DVT in our critically ill adult patients. METHODS: All critically ill adult patients admitted to the medical-surgical ICU with CVC inserted were included in this observational prospective study. After catheter removal we performed duplex ultrasound examination to assess the patency of the vein and establish if CR-DVT was present. RESULTS: A total number of 308 catheters met the inclusion criteria of which 198 were included in the statistical analysis. The CVC was inserted into a subclavian vein (SCV) in 139 (70%) cases and in an internal jugular vein (IJV) in 59 (30%) cases. The 28-day mortality rate was 14.1%. We found CR-DVT during duplex ultrasound examination in 47 (26%) of all cases. 33 (70%) of the CR-DVT were diagnosed in the IJV and 14 (30%) in the SCV. The risk factors for the development of CR-DVT we identified included cannulation of the IJV and the use of treatment dose of LMWH. The effect of CR-DVT on 28-day mortality was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The risk factors for CR-DVT we identified were IJV as a site for CVC cannulation and the use of therapeutic anticoagulation prior to cannulation. Our recommendation would be preferential cannulation of a subclavian vein as opposed to an internal jugular vein in order to reduce the risk of CR-DVT.

The natural history and outcomes of line-associated upper extremity deep venous thromboses in critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE: Anticoagulation remains the standard of care for line-associated upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (UEDVT). This treatment carries the risk of hemorrhagic complications, possibly more so in surgical patients. Considering the low-risk profile of UEDVT-which is associated with fewer, less severe pulmonary emboli than lower extremity deep venous thrombosis-current UEDVT treatment guidelines may be overly aggressive. The goal of this study was to review outcomes of line-associated UEDVT in critically ill patients and to define the efficacy of current treatment protocols in pulmonary embolism (PE) prevention while avoiding hemorrhagic complications. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 193 consecutive patients admitted to the medical and surgical intensive care unit (ICU) at a tertiary care hospital between 2009 and 2014 diagnosed with acute line-associated UEDVT by duplex ultrasound. The examined treatment arms included anticoagulation with intent to reach therapeutic levels, prophylactic or subtherapeutic anticoagulation, and no anticoagulation. Primary outcomes included major hemorrhage (defined as any intracranial hemorrhage or any hemorrhage resulting in transfusion, ICU readmission, or death), PE, in-hospital mortality, total hospital length of stay (LOS), and ICU LOS. RESULTS: Of the 10,907 patients, 161 (1.48%) were diagnosed with acute line-associated UEDVT, 81 of 6027 in the medical ICU (1.34%) and 80 of 4880 in the surgical ICU (1.64%), after exclusion of 32 patients with concurrent lower extremity deep venous thrombosis. In total, 122 patients (75.8%) received anticoagulation with intent to reach therapeutic levels, 23 (14.3%) received prophylactic anticoagulation, and 16 (9.94%) received no anticoagulation. Major hemorrhage was significantly more common than symptomatic PE in all patients (15.5% vs 4.97%; P < .001). A single fatal PE and two fatal hemorrhages were recorded across the series. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (34.8% vs 16.7%; P = .726) or ICU LOS (33.1 vs 18.3 days; P = .739) for patients who developed major hemorrhage or symptomatic PE. On multivariate analysis, incidence of symptomatic PE was not significantly related to Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score (P = .963), anticoagulation regimen (P = .940), catheter type (P = .313), or bacteremia (P = .833). CONCLUSIONS: Major hemorrhagic complications are more common than symptomatic PE after anticoagulation for line-associated UEDVT in ICU patients, raising concern that current treatment guidelines are too aggressive. These data necessitate further prospective investigation to determine the optimal treatment protocol for line-associated UEDVT in this critically ill cohort.

Risk of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism after heart transplantation: clinical outcomes comparing upper extremity deep vein thrombosis and lower extremity deep vein thrombosis.

INTRODUCTION: Heart transplant patients have risk factors that place them at higher risk for acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), than the general population. We assessed for rate of VTE and incidence of PE-related mortality among heart transplant patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1258 heart transplant patients were evaluated for the development of VTE. The diagnosis of DVT was made by Duplex ultrasonography, and PE was diagnosed by computerized tomography pulmonary angiography or ventilation-perfusion radionuclide scan. PE-related mortality was assessed at one yr, three yr, and five yr post-transplant. RESULTS: A total of 117 (9.3%) patients were diagnosed with DVT, including 65 of 117 (55.5%) with lower extremity DVT (LEDVT) and 52 of 117 (44.4%) with upper extremity DVT (UEDVT). A total of 24 (1.9%) patients experienced PE with seven (29.2%) resulting deaths. The rate of LEDVT and UEDVT was similar (55.5% vs. 44.4%); however, the incidence of PE was greater for those with LEDVT (23.1% vs. 7.7%; p = 0.04). Patients with PE had lower survival over the five-yr follow-up period compared to those with DVT only (67% vs. 81%; p = 0.51). CONCLUSION: Heart transplant patients have a high incidence of VTE despite current best practice, indicating a need for a more aggressive approach to thromboprophylaxis.

A prognostic score to identify low-risk outpatients with acute deep vein thrombosis in the upper extremity.

BACKGROUND: No studies have identified which patients with upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) are at low risk for adverse events within the first week of therapy. METHODS: We used data from Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica to explore in patients with upper-extremity DVT a prognostic score that correctly identified patients with lower limb DVT at low risk for pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, or death within the first week. RESULTS: As of December 2014, 1135 outpatients with upper-extremity DVT were recruited. Of these, 515 (45%) were treated at home. During the first week, three patients (0.26%) experienced pulmonary embolism, two (0.18%) had major bleeding, and four (0.35%) died. We assigned 1 point to patients with chronic heart failure, creatinine clearance levels 30-60 mL min(-1) , recent bleeding, abnormal platelet count, recent immobility, or cancer without metastases; 2 points to those with metastatic cancer; and 3 points to those with creatinine clearance levels < 30 mL min(-1) . Overall, 759 (67%) patients scored ≤ 1 point and were considered to be at low risk. The rate of the composite outcome within the first week was 0.26% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.004-0.87) in patients at low risk and 1.86% (95% CI 0.81-3.68) in the remaining patients. C-statistics was 0.73 (95% CI 0.57-0.88). Net reclassification improvement was 22%, and integrated discrimination improvement was 0.0055. CONCLUSIONS: Using six easily available variables, we identified outpatients with upper-extremity DVT at low risk for adverse events within the first week. These data may help to safely treat more patients at home.

Surgical treatment of central venous catheter related septic deep venous thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical features and outcomes of catheter related central venous thrombosis and whether a surgical approach can be an effective treatment modality in selected cases that are refractory to conservative management. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the 46 consecutive patients who were suspected of having central venous catheter related infected deep venous thrombosis and who met the eligibility criteria. RESULTS: Conservative management achieved clinical improvement in 26 (56.5%) patients and failed in 20 (43.5%), of whom surgical thrombectomy was performed in 13. The remaining seven patients died before surgery could be performed or their clinical condition was too poor. Apart from one case of wound hematoma (7.7%), post-operative complications that related to the surgical procedure were not observed. Patency of the involved vein was re-established in 12 of the 13 (92.3%) surgically treated patients, and clinical improvement was achieved in 11 (84.6%). In particular, the five patients whose blood cultures revealed Candida species exhibited prompt defervescence after surgical thrombectomy. CONCLUSION: Although conservative management is the first therapy of choice in patients with central venous catheter related infected thrombosis, surgical treatment that removes the septic material can be regarded as a last resort in critically ill patients with septic thrombophlebitis that is refractory to conservative management.

Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty for symptomatic central vein restenosis in patients with hemodialysis fistulas.

PURPOSE: To report a retrospective observational analysis of standard balloon angioplasty (BA) vs. paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty (PCBA) for symptomatic central vein restenoses in patients with impaired native hemodialysis fistulas. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 27 consecutive patients (15 men; mean age 66 ± 13.8 years, range 39-90) with 32 central vein stenoses (CVS; 6 axillary, 11 subclavian, 12 brachiocephalic, and/or 3 superior caval veins) treated successfully using BA. Freedom from reintervention after BA of de novo lesions was 7.4 ± 7.9 months (range 1-24). Twenty-five (92.6%) patients developed symptomatic restenoses and were treated one or more times by BA (n = 32) or PCBA (n = 20) using custom-made paclitaxel-coated balloons (diameter 6-14 mm). RESULTS: Technical (< 30% residual stenosis) and clinical (functional fistula) success rates for the initial and secondary angioplasty procedures were 100%. No minor/major procedure-associated complications occurred. Mean follow-up was 18.4 ± 17.5 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis for freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) found PCBA superior to BA (p = 0.029). Median freedom from TLR after BA was 5 months; after PCBA, > 50% of patients were event-free during the observation period (mean freedom from TLR 10 months). Restenosis intervals were prolonged by PCBA (median 9 months) vs. BA (median 4 months; p = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty of central vein restenosis in patients with hemodialysis shunts yields a statistically significant longer freedom from TLR compared to standard balloon angioplasty.

Low incidence of pulmonary embolism associated with upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Most recent Chest 2008 guidelines counsel at least 3 months of anticoagulation for acute upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis (UEDVT). These guidelines are inconsistently followed, perhaps owing to relatively limited information regarding clinical outcomes among patients with UEDVT. Our institution maintains an UEDVT registry of consecutively encountered patients with sonographically confirmed UEDVT. We analyzed patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes among these patients. METHODS: Between April 2005 and November 2008, 300 consecutively encountered peripheral vascular laboratory patients with UEDVTs were identified. Data on UEDVT sonographic characteristics, patient demographics, anticoagulation treatment, pulmonary embolism (PE) incidence and diagnostic modality, hemorrhagic complications, and mortality were then extracted. RESULTS: Among the 300 patients, there was deep venous obstruction in the distal innominate (n = 69), internal jugular (n = 146), subclavian (n = 161), axillary (n = 107), and brachial (n = 91) veins. Two hundred forty-six patients (82%) had UEDVTs identified as clearly acute or acute on chronic, based on sonographic appearance. Most patients with UEDVTs were symptomatic (n = 265, 88%). One hundred six patients had documented malignancy (35%), 92 were postoperative or trauma patients (31%), and 76 patients were obese (body mass index: >30, 25%). Additionally, 240 patients had associated or previous indwelling central venous lines or leads (80%). One hundred twenty-eight patients (43%) were initially anticoagulated with heparin, whereas 121 of these patients were converted to warfarin therapy (40%) for variable lengths of time. One hundred sixty-seven patients were not treated with anticoagulation (56%), of whom 16 had documented contraindication to anticoagulation. Although the anticoagulated subset of patients tended to be younger, the decision to anticoagulate patients correlated significantly with the sonographically documented acute nature of the deep venous thrombosis, and its extent. Six patients (2%) suffered PE in association with their UEDVT diagnosis. There was no PE-related mortality. However, among anticoagulated UEDVT patients, there were four patients who suffered intracranial hemorrhage resulting in three deaths, and an additional three patients who required rehospitalization for upper gastrointestinal (n = 2) or stomal (n = 1) hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy is inconsistently used to treat UEDVT and most often used for patients with multiple vein segments involved and with sonographically acute UEDVT components. However, regardless of the decision to anticoagulate, the incidence of PE attributable to UEDVT is small (2%), regardless of treatment with anticoagulation. Given the observed mortality associated with anticoagulation in this fragile patient cohort, the risk-benefit analysis for anticoagulation does not favor routine anticoagulation among these patients.

Treatment of upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) can result in fatal pulmonary embolism if not treated. Patients with malignancy may be at particularly high risk. Heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin followed by warfarin has been used as standard treatment for lower extremity DVT. However, a paucity of studies exist reporting the efficacy and safety of these regimens in patients with upper extremity DVT. We studied the effectiveness and safety of treatment with dalteparin sodium followed by warfarin and also dalteparin sodium monotherapy for 3 months in patients with confirmed upper extremity DVT. METHODS: Consecutive patients with confirmed upper extremity DVT received daily dalteparin sodium for 5-7 days followed by warfarin therapy for 3 months (phase I) or dalteparin sodium monotherapy for 3 months (phase II). The primary outcome measure was the incidence of new symptomatic venous thromboembolism during the 3-month follow-up period. The outcome measure of safety was the incidence of major and minor bleeding. RESULTS: Of 631 consecutive patients screened, 74 were eligible and 67 enrolled. No patients receiving either phase I (0%; 95% CI, 0-12%) or phase II (0%; 95% CI, 0-9%) therapy had venous thromboembolism on 3-month follow-up. One patient (4%; 95% CI, 0-18%) receiving phase I therapy experienced major bleeding. Five patients died during the follow-up period; none were attributed to pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with upper extremity DVT may be treated safely with either dalteparin sodium followed by warfarin or dalteparin sodium monotherapy for 3 months with a good prognosis.

Upper extremity deep venous thrombosis: reassessing the risk for subsequent pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Although the incidence of upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (UEDVT) diagnoses has increased, anticoagulation therapy for UEDVT remains inconsistent and of variable duration. This study sought to analyze our institution's current treatment practices for UEDVT and assess the risk for subsequent pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: Between April 2005 and July 2007, 200 consecutively encountered patients with UEDVTs were identified in the Peripheral Vascular Laboratory. Then, UEDVT location and sonographic characteristics, patient demographics, anticoagulation treatment, and PE incidence and mortality were examined. RESULTS: Among the 200 patients with UEDVT, 156 (78%) had UEDVTs identified as clearly acute or acute on chronic, based on sonographic appearance. In all, 85% of the patients were symptomatic (n = 171). Among the patients, 71 (36%) had documented malignancy, 58 (29%) were postoperative or suffering from trauma, and 52 (26%) were obese (body mass index: >30). In addition, 153 (76%) had associated current or previous indwelling lines or leads. A total of 73 patients (36%) were put on anticoagulation therapy for variable periods. Younger age of the patient, duplex evidence of an acute deep venous thrombosis, and involvement of multiple named upper extremity venous segments were independent predictors of the decision to initiate anticoagulation therapy for patients with UEDVT. Two patients (1%) suffered PE, most likely the consequence of their UEDVTs. An additional two patients with UEDVT treated with coumadin died months after hospital discharge from intracranial bleedings after minor falls. CONCLUSION: Currently, the clinical decision to initiate anticoagulation therapy for patients with UEDVT is most associated with the documented acute nature of the deep venous thrombosis by duplex ultrasonography, involvement of multiple venous segments, and younger age of the patient. The incidence of PE attributable to previously documented UEDVT is very small (1%), regardless of anticoagulant therapy. Anticoagulation therapy for UEDVT is most likely to be best suited to address the symptoms of UEDVT; its proposed use to decrease the very small risk of PE may be rarely indicated, and must be carefully weighed with the risks associated with therapeutic anticoagulation in this patient population.

Upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis: a review.

Upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis is less common than lower-extremity deep venous thrombosis. However, upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis is associated with similar adverse consequences and is becoming more common in patients with complex medical conditions requiring central venous catheters or wires. Although guidelines suggest that this disorder be managed using approaches similar to those for lower-extremity deep venous thrombosis, studies are refining the prognosis and management of upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis. Physicians should be familiar with the diagnostic and treatment considerations for this disease. This review will differentiate between primary and secondary upper-extremity deep venous thromboses; assess the risk factors and clinical sequelae associated with upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis, comparing these with lower-extremity deep venous thrombosis; and describe an approach to treatment and prevention of secondary upper-extremity deep venous thrombosis based on clinical evidence.