The Role of Pharmacomechanical Endovascular Intervention for Iliofemoral Vein Thrombosis Compared to Conventional Anticoagulation Therapy

Although anticoagulation therapy is the primary treatment for deep vein thrombosis (DVT), it has not been associated with the rapid recanalization of the venous occlusion. Moreover, it is associated with long-term disability due to post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). In contrast, pharmacomechanical endovascular intervention (PMI) results in more rapid clinical improvement in DVT patients, but there are few reports on its long-term outcomes. This retrospective study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of PMI compared to conventional anticoagulation therapy (ACA) for acute and subacute iliofemoral DVT. We reviewed the medical records of 102 patients with iliofemoral DVT. A total of 46 patients for ACA and 56 patients for PMI were enrolled. We analyzed the clinical differences between the PMI and ACA groups by comparing the clinical signs, residual DVT free-rate, and PTS-free rate. There were no statistically significant differences in the demographic characteristics and risk factors except age between the groups (age: ACA, 52.0 ± 18.0 years; PMI, 59.0 ± 17.0 years; P = 0.035). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year residual DVT-free rate (ACA = 84.7%, 71.6%, and 46.0%; PMI = 82.1%, 76.8%, and 76.8%, respectively; P = 0.235) was not significantly different. However, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year PTS-free rate was significantly different (ACA = 93.5%, 74.0%, and 55.7%; PMI = 92.9%, 90.0%, and 90.0%, respectively; P = 0.019). There was no significant difference in the rate of other complications. PMI showed a lower incidence of PTS during the follow-up period. Therefore, PMI should be considered as an effective therapeutic modality for patients with iliofemoral DVT.