These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities: effects of different treatment on the incidence of pulmonary embolism].
    Author: Yang DH, Li J, He JA, Hu XH, Xin SJ, Duan ZQ, Xu K.
    Journal: Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2009 Dec 01; 47(23):1787-9. PubMed ID: 20193547.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of the different treatments of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) of lower extremities on the incidence of the pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: 201 patients (97 males and 104 females, mean age 60.4 years ranged from 24 to 83) from August 2002 to June 2008 with DVT were retrospectively reviewed and divided into 3 groups based on different treatment, including anticoagulants plus thrombolytics alone (group 1), thrombectomy plus anticoagulants plus thrombolytics (group 2) and anticoagulants plus thrombolytics after delivery of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter (group 3) respectively. One hundred and seventy-four cases had left lower limb DVT, 24 cases had right lower limb DVT and 3 cases had both sides of lower limb DVT. Different incidence of PE in different period (7-14 d in hospital and follow-up after discharge) were calculated. Effects of the three different treatment methods of DVT on the incidence of PE were studied. RESULTS: For in-patients, the prevalence of symptomatic PE was 2.8% (3/107) in the group of receiving anticoagulants plus thrombolytics alone, but in the other two groups, no symptomatic PE happened. There was no significant difference in incidence of symptomatic PE among the 3 groups (P=0.425). For patients discharged, after 6 to 72-month follow-up (mean 24-month), we found that no PE happened in group 1 and group 2, while in group 3, the incidence of PE was 2.4% (1/42). There was also no significant difference (P=0.656) among 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference in relation to the incidence of PE in these 3 groups. Therefore vena cava filter implantation should be restricted to optimal indication.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]