Comparison of catheter-directed thrombolysis with and without percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy for subacute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis.

Objective To evaluate and compare the treatment efficacy and safety between catheter-directed thrombolysis monotherapy and catheter-directed thrombolysis combined with percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy for patients with subacute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of a total of 74 subacute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis patients who underwent catheter-directed thrombolysis with and without percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy. Patients treated with catheter-directed thrombolysis combined with percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy group, n = 30) or catheter-directed thrombolysis monotherapy (catheter-directed thrombolysis group, n = 44) were included. The primary endpoints were the clinical efficacy rate of thrombolysis, primary patency, and the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (at 12 months diagnosed according to the original Villalta score criteria. Secondary endpoints were the total urokinase dose, the thrombolysis time, the detumescence rate and complications. Results The percentage of successful thrombolysis for percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy group was higher than that for catheter-directed thrombolysis group (P = 0.045). At the 12-month follow-up, there was no difference in the primary patency (P > 0.05) or the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (P = 0.36). Percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy group had significant advantages in reducing urokinase doses and thrombolysis times compared with catheter-directed thrombolysis group for patients with thrombus clearance levels II and III (P < 0.05). Conclusion Catheter-directed thrombolysis combined with percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy performs better in removing vein thrombi, reducing urokinase doses, and shortening thrombolysis times.