Contemporary nationwide trends and in-hospital outcomes of adjunctive stenting in patients undergoing catheter-directed thrombolysis for proximal deep venous thrombosis

Alice Tang, Vladimir Lakhter, Chad J. Zack, Anthony J. Comerota, Neal Shah, Huaqing Zhao, Riyaz Bashir

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective: Outflow venous stenting as an adjunct to catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) is performed to prevent recurrent thrombosis and to reduce the risk of post-thrombotic syndrome. Historical data show that stenting improves outcomes of surgical thrombectomy in patients with iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and recent observational data suggest that stenting improves long-term outcomes of CDT. However, the impact of stenting during CDT on acute safety outcomes is unknown. We sought to investigate the contemporary trends, safety outcomes, and resource utilization of adjunctive stent placement in patients undergoing CDT. Methods: Patients with proximal lower extremity and caval DVT were identified within the National Inpatient Sample from January 2005 to December 2013. From this data set, we stratified our patients into three groups: patients who received CDT alone, patients who received CDT plus angioplasty, and patients who received CDT plus angioplasty with stenting. We used an inverse probability treatment weighting algorithm to create three weighted cohorts. Cochran-Armitage test was used to evaluate the trends of stent placement among patients treated with CDT. The primary outcome was a composite end point of all-cause mortality, gastrointestinal bleed, or intracranial hemorrhage. Results: A total of 138,049 patients were discharged with a principal diagnosis of proximal and caval DVT; 7097 of these patients received CDT (5.1%). From this group, 2854 (40.2%) were treated with CDT alone, 2311 (32.6%) received adjunctive angioplasty alone, and 1932 (27.2%) received adjunctive angioplasty and stent. Adjunctive stenting had a significantly lower rate of primary composite outcome compared with CDT alone (2.7% vs 3.8%; P =.04). Stent placement was associated with a similar length of stay compared with angioplasty and CDT alone groups (6.8 vs 6.9 vs 7.1 days, respectively; P =.94) and higher in-hospital charges ($115,164.01 ± $76,985.31 vs $98,089.82 ± $72,921.94 vs $80,441.63 ± $74,024.98; P <.001). Conclusions: This nationwide study suggests that one in four patients undergoing CDT is treated with adjunctive stent placement in the United States. This observational study showed that adjunctive stenting does not adversely affect the acute safety outcomes of CDT; however, it was associated with increased hospital charges.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)62-72.e1
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders
Volume9
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2021

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Contemporary nationwide trends and in-hospital outcomes of adjunctive stenting in patients undergoing catheter-directed thrombolysis for proximal deep venous thrombosis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this