Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Long-term outcome after additional catheter-directed thrombolysis versus standard treatment for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (the CaVenT study): a randomised controlled trial

Research article published in Lancet (London, England) (2011)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: 1. November 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Forschungsartikel — EvidenzübersichtArtikelreferenz
Evidenz: Randomisierte kontrollierte StudieKlinische LiteraturArzneimittelentwicklungEnden T et al. · Lancet (London, England), 2012

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Conventional anticoagulant treatment for acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) effectively prevents thrombus extension and recurrence, but does not dissolve the clot, and many patients develop post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). We aimed to examine whether additional treatment with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) using alteplase reduced development of PTS. METHODS: Participants in this open-label, randomised controlled trial were recruited from 20 hospitals in the Norwegian southeastern health region. Patients aged 18-75 years with a first-time iliofemoral DVT were included within 21 days from symptom onset. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by picking lowest number of sealed envelopes to conventional treatment alone or additional CDT. Randomisation was stratified for involvement of the pelvic veins with blocks of six. We assessed two co-primary outcomes: frequency of PTS as assessed by Villalta score at 24 months, and iliofemoral patency after 6 months. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00251771. FINDINGS: 209 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (108 control, 101 CDT). At completion of 24 months' follow-up, data for clinical status were available for 189 patients (90%; 99 control, 90 CDT). At 24 months, 37 (41·1%, 95% CI 31·5-51·4) patients allocated additional CDT presented with PTS compared with 55 (55·6%, 95% CI 45·7-65·0) in the control group (p=0·047). The difference in PTS corresponds to an absolute risk reduction of 14·4% (95% CI 0·2-27·9), and the number needed to treat was 7 (95% CI 4-502). Iliofemoral patency after 6 months was reported in 58 patients (65·9%, 95% CI 55·5-75·0) on CDT versus 45 (47·4%, 37·6-57·3) on control (p=0·012). 20 bleeding complications related to CDT included three major and five clinically relevant bleeds. INTERPRETATION: Additional CDT should be considered in patients with a high proximal DVT and low risk of bleeding. FUNDING: South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority; Research Council of Norway; University of Oslo; Oslo University Hospital.

Abstract aus PubMed (NCBI) für den zitierten Eintrag, in der Originalsprache wiedergegeben. Maßgeblich ist die Fassung der Originalpublikation.

Das Abstract wird nicht übersetzt, damit die eigene Wortwahl der Autoren erhalten bleibt.

PublikationstypJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Indexierte MeSH-BegriffeAcute DiseaseAnticoagulantsCatheterization, PeripheralFemaleFemoral VeinHumansIliac VeinMaleMiddle AgedPostthrombotic SyndromeThrombolytic TherapyTreatment OutcomeVenous Thrombosis

Zusammenfassung

Conventional anticoagulant treatment for acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) effectively prevents thrombus extension and recurrence, but does not dissolve the clot, and many patients develop post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). We aimed to examine whether additional treatment with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) using alteplase reduced development of PTS.

Zitation

Literaturangabe (Vancouver-Stil)

Enden T, Haig Y, Kløw NE, Slagsvold CE, Sandvik L, Ghanima W, et al. Long-term outcome after additional catheter-directed thrombolysis versus standard treatment for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (the CaVenT study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9810):31-38. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61753-4. PMID: 22172244

Die bibliografischen Angaben (Autoren, Band, Seiten, DOI) stammen aus dem PubMed-Eintrag.

Verwandter klinischer Kontext

Verwandte Forschungsarbeiten

Weitere begutachtete Studien in der Kategorie „Klinische Literatur“.

Alle von der ASH analysierten Studien →

Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: 28. Mai 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: 1. November 2026

Diese Website stellt Bildungsinformationen bereit und ist weder eine medizinische Beratung noch eine Diagnose oder Behandlungsempfehlung. Die medizinische Blutegeltherapie ist mit klinisch relevanten Risiken verbunden und sollte ausschließlich von qualifizierten Klinikerinnen und Klinikern unter institutionell genehmigten Protokollen durchgeführt werden. Die FDA-510(k)-Freigabe für medizinische Blutegel ist auf bestimmte Indikationen beschränkt; experimentelle und Off-Label-Diskussionen werden entsprechend gekennzeichnet. Für patientenspezifische Beratung wenden Sie sich an eine qualifizierte Gesundheitsfachkraft.