Direct oral anticoagulants decrease treatment failure for acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: Optimal medical therapy for acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (DVT) remains an enigma. While clinical trials demonstrate non-inferiority with an oral anti-Xa inhibitor, or direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), versus combined low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA), the most effective regimen remains to be determined. METHODS: This study is a single-center retrospective cohort study from October 2014 to December 2015 of patients with a diagnosis of acute DVT and subsequent serial lower extremity venous duplex. Demographics, medical history, medications, serial ultrasound findings, as well as the primary anticoagulant used for treatment were collected and analyzed by two independent data extractors. Treatment failure was defined as any new DVT or progression of an existing DVT within 3 months of diagnosis of the index clot. Risk factors for treatment failure were assessed using standard odds ratios and Fischer's exact test. RESULTS: Among 496 patients with an acute lower extremity DVT, 54% (n = 266) were men, mean age was 61 years, 35% (n = 174) involved the popliteal or more proximal segments, and 442 had documentation of the primary treatment for DVT: 20% (n = 90) received nothing; 20% (n = 92) received an oral VKA; 34% (n = 149) received a DOAC; 20% (n = 90) received LMWH; and 5% (n = 21) received another class of anticoagulant. Within 3 months, 21% (n=89 out of 427) had treatment failure defined as any new DVT or progression of prior DVT. Patients treated with a DOAC were less likely to experience treatment failure when compared with any other treatment (odds ratio 0.43; 95% confidence intervals [0.23, 0.79]; p = 0.0069) and when compared with traditional oral VKA (OR 0.44; 95% CI [0.21, 0.92]; p = 0.029). None of prior history of DVT, pulmonary embolism, thrombophilia, renal insufficiency, hepatic insufficiency, cancer, or antiplatelet therapy correlated with treatment failure. Treatment outcome did not correlate with being on any anticoagulation versus none (p = 0.74), nor did it correlate with the duration of treatment (<3 months versus ≥3 months) (p = 0.42). Proximal and distal DVTs showed no difference in treatment failure (19% versus 22%, respectively; p = 0.43). CONCLUSION: In summary, the use of a DOAC for acute lower extremity DVT yielded better overall outcomes and fewer treatment failures at 3 months as compared to traditional oral VKA therapy based on serial duplex imaging.

Advances and challenges in regenerative therapies for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a significant source of mortality worldwide and carries a mortality of greater than 80% after rupture. Despite extensive efforts to develop pharmacological treatments, there is currently no effective agent to prevent aneurysm growth and rupture. Current treatment paradigms only rely on the identification and surveillance of small aneurysms, prior to ultimate open surgical or endovascular repair. Recently, regenerative therapies have emerged as promising avenues to address the degenerative changes observed in AAA. This review briefly outlines current clinical management principles, characteristics, and pharmaceutical targets of AAA. Subsequently, a thorough discussion of regenerative approaches is provided. These include cellular approaches (vascular smooth muscle cells, endothelial cells, and mesenchymal stem cells) as well as the delivery of therapeutic molecules, gene therapies, and regenerative biomaterials. Lastly, additional barriers and considerations for clinical translation are provided. In conclusion, regenerative approaches hold significant promise for in situ reversal of tissue damages in AAA, necessitating sustained research and innovation to achieve successful and translatable therapies in a new era in AAA management.

Efficacy and safety of sonographer discretion to terminate a venous duplex ultrasound for diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis in coronavirus disease 2019 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Sonographers performing venous duplex ultrasound (VDUS) of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have an increased risk of exposure owing to their close contact with these patients for an extended period. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of a modified COVID-19 VDUS protocol to reduce sonographer exposure to COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective review. Patients who had undergone VDUS under the modified COVID-19 protocol between March 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020, with a confirmed or presumed COVID-19 diagnosis at the VDUS were included. The modified COVID-19 protocol was defined as the ability of the sonographer to terminate the examination on detection of an acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The primary outcome measures were the number of anatomic deep venous segments recorded by the sonographer, which was used as a surrogate measure for sonographer exposure time, and the number of acute DVTs found on follow-up examinations in segments not visualized at the index VDUS. RESULTS: A total of 160 lower extremity VDUS (LEVDUS) scans and 72 upper extremity VDUS (UEVDUS) scans were performed using the modified COVID-19 protocol. The index VDUS had found an acute DVT for 44 of 160 patients (27.5%) who had undergone LEVDUS and 26 of 72 (36.6%) who had undergone UEVDUS. On follow-up imaging, 7 of 38 LEVDUS scans (17.9%) and 1 of 10 UEVDUS scans (10%) had demonstrated a new acute DVT. Malignancy and surgery 30 days before imaging were significantly associated with acute lower extremity DVT, and mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were associated with acute upper extremity DVT. On the index VDUS, the average was 10.6 of 12 total visualized segments on LEVDUS and 6.4 of 10 total segments on UEVDUS. Of the index VDUS scans, 35.6% of the LEVDUS and 78.6% of the UEVDUS scans had been abbreviated. The index VDUS scans that were positive for acute DVT had had significantly fewer visualized segments for both lower (8.4 vs 11.5; P < .0001) and upper (4.2 vs 7.6) extremities (P < .0001). On the follow-up examinations, only one of eight new acute DVTs had been found in a patient whose index VDUS had been abbreviated and the corresponding segment not assessed. These findings did not affect the patient's clinical course. CONCLUSIONS: The modified COVID-19 VDUS protocol reduced sonographers' potential exposure time to COVID-19. Additionally, the clinical efficacy was maintained, with no missed DVTs, despite the abbreviation of the VDUS examinations.