Compliance with recommendations of clinical practice in the management of venous thromboembolism in cancer: the CARMEN study

Cancer is associated with venous thromboembolism in 20% of patients. In such patients, thrombosis is difficult to treat, associated with bleeding, recurrence, and death. Specific treatments for venous thromboembolism in cancer are recommended. Guidelines have been implemented in many countries and international guidelines have been recently developed. We evaluated the adhesion to national French guidelines via a survey of cancer patients treated for venous thromboembolism. METHODS: A national cross-sectional observational study evaluated the adhesion to guidelines in hospitalized patients. Good clinical practice was defined as initial 10-day treatment with injectable molecules followed by long-term treatment with low molecular weight heparin for at least 3 months. Demographic data, cancer type, stage, treatment, risk factors and type of thrombosis, were recorded. RESULTS: Five patients were included in 47 centers. Overall adhesion to guidelines was present in 59% (55-63%) of patients (295/500). During initial treatment, adhesion was high (487/496; 98%) but dropped (296/486; 62%) during the long-term maintenance. In patients with renal insufficiency, only a fourth of them received the adequate treatment. A majority of patients had metastatic disease (64%). Cancer sites were gastro-intestinal (25%), gynecologic (23%), pulmonary (21%), hematological (14%), urologic (10%), or other (8%). Lung and hematological malignancies were significantly associated with the highest and lowest rates of adhesion. CONCLUSION: Adhesion to national guidelines for treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer is not optimal. Good compliance is observed during initial treatment, but drops after 10 days, underlying the need for further education to achieve a better implementation on a national level

Predictive factors for concurrent deep-vein thrombosis and symptomatic venous thromboembolic recurrence in case of superficial venous thrombosis. The OPTIMEV study

Superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) prognosis is debated and its management is highly variable. It was the objective of this study to assess predictive risk factors for concurrent deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) at presentation and for three-month adverse outcome. Using data from the prospective multicentre OPTIMEV study, we analysed SVT predictive factors associated with concurrent DVT and three-month adverse outcome. Out of 788 SVT included, 227 (28.8%) exhibited a concurrent DVT at presentation. Age >75years (odds ratio [OR]=2.9 [1.5-5.9]), active cancer (OR=2.6 [1.3-5.2]), inpatient status (OR=2.3 [1.2-4.4]) and SVT on non-varicose veins (OR=1.8 [1.1-2.7]) were significantly and independently associated with an increased risk of concurrent DVT. 39.4% of SVT on non-varicose veins presented a concurrent DVT. However, varicose vein status did not influence the three-month prognosis as rates of death, symptomatic venous thromboembolic (VTE) recurrence and major bleeding were equivalent in both non-varicose and varicose SVTs (1.4% vs. 1.1%; 3.4% vs. 2.8%; 0.7% vs. 0.3%). Only male gender (OR=3.5 [1.1-11.3]) and inpatient status (OR=4.5 [1.3-15.3]) were independent predictive factors for symptomatic VTE recurrence but the number of events was low (n=15, 3.0%). Three-month numbers of deaths (n=6, 1.2%) and of major bleedings (n=2, 0.4%) were even lower, precluding any relevant interpretation. In conclusion, SVT on non-varicose veins and some classical risk factors for DVT were predictive factors for concurrent DVT at presentation. As SVT remains mostly a clinical diagnosis, these data may help selecting patients deserving an ultrasound examination or needing anticoagulation while waiting for diagnostic tests. Larger studies are needed to evaluate predictive factors for adverse outcome

25 mm Hg versus 35 mm Hg elastic compression stockings to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome after deep vein thrombosis (CELEST): a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

The optimal strength of compression needed to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after a proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is debated. We aimed to assess whether 25 mm Hg elastic compression stockings (ECS) are non-inferior to 35 mm Hg ECS in preventing PTS after a DVT. In this multicentre, double-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial, we enrolled adults (≥18 years) with a first ipsilateral proximal DVT attending 46 French vascular medicine hospital departments or private practices. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre, age, and sex; with varying block sizes of two and four) to wear 25 mm Hg or 35 mm Hg ECS for 2 years. The primary outcome was the cumulative rate of PTS 2 years after inclusion, defined by a Villalta scale (≥5). Efficacy was assessed by intention-to-treat and in eligible participants who had complete primary outcome data. A per-protocol analysis was also conducted among compliant patients as a secondary outcome measure. Safety was assessed in all participants who used ECS at least once, and for which we have at least some tolerance information during follow-up. The margin for non-inferiority was 12·5%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01578122, and has been completed. Between June 28, 2012, and July 21, 2017, we enrolled 341 eligible participants who consented to randomisation. 233 (68%) were men and median age was 59 years (IQR 45-70). Collection of ethnicity and race as a routine research variable is not authorised in France. Median follow-up was 735 days (IQR 721-760). 249 (73%) had complete data at 2 years. For the primary analysis, 40 (31%) of 129 participants with complete data in the 25 mm Hg ECS group and 40 (33%) of 120 in the 35 mm Hg group had PTS (absolute difference -2·3% [90% CI -12·1 to 7·4], p <sub>non-inferiority</sub> =0·0062; relative risk 0·93, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·33). Results remained similar after imputation of missing data in patients we were authorised to do so: the cumulative proportion of PTS was 45 (29%) of 154 in the 25 mm Hg ECS group versus 52 (35%) of 148 in the 35 mm Hg ECS group (relative risk 0·83, 95% CI 0·60 to 1·16). Absolute difference was -5·9%, (90% CI -14·7 to 2·9), p=0·0003 for non-inferiority. Adherence was optimal (>80% and modified GIRERD score of 0-2) for 75 (51%) of 146 patients assigned to 25 mm Hg ECS and for 56 (42%) of 134 patients assigned to 35 mm Hg ECS (p=0·11). Regarding major adverse events related to ECS, there were no between-group differences in rates of deep vein thrombosis (0 vs 1 [0·6%]), ipsilateral leg ulcer (0 vs 1 [0·6%]), infection (0 vs 0), or death (0 vs 0) between the 169 patients evaluated in the 25 mm Hg ECS group and the 159 patients in the 35 mm Hg ECS group. Two (1%) of 328 patients who ever wore ESC developed ECS-related serious adverse events, one distal DVT and one leg ulcer (both in the 35 mm Hg ECS group). In the 25 mm Hg group, 6 patients died, 14 had a venous thromboembolic recurrence (proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism), and 7 had a major bleed. In the 35 mm Hg group, 5 patients died, 10 had a venous thromboembolic recurrence (proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism), and 6 had a major bleed. Although we did not reach the prespecified sample size, our results suggest that 25 mm Hg ECS are non-inferior to 35 mm Hg ECS in preventing PTS. Larger more powerful studies are needed. Laboratoires Innothera, France

A prospective randomized trial comparing sirolimus-coated balloon with paclitaxel-coated balloon in de novo small vessels

BACKGROUND There are no data comparing sirolimus-coated balloons (SCBs [MagicTouch, Concept Medical]) to paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs [SeQuent Please Neo, B. Braun]) for the treatment of de novo small vessel disease (SVD).OBJECTIVES This study sought to compare quantitative coronary angiographic outcomes at 6 months after treatment of de novo SVD with a PCB or SCB.METHODS This prospective, multicenter, noninferiority trial randomized 121 patients (129 SVD lesions) to treatment with an SCB or PCB, with balloon sizing determined using optical coherence tomography. The primary endpoint was noninferiority for the 6-month angiographic net lumen gain.RESULTS Angiographic follow-up was completed in 109 (90.1%) patients in the per-protocol analysis. The mean +/- SD angiographic net gains were 0.25 +/- 0.40 mm with SCBs vs 0.48 +/- 0.37 mm with PCBs, resulting in SCBs failing to meet the 0.30 mm criterion for noninferiority (P-noninferiority = 0.173), with an absolute difference of -0.23 mm (95% CI: -0.37 to -0.09) secondary to a smaller late loss (0.00 +/- 0.32 mm vs 0.32 +/- 0.47 mm; P < 0.001) and more frequent late lumen enlargement (53.7% vs 30.0%; OR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.22-5.67; P = 0.014) with PCBs. Binary restenosis rates were 32.8% and 12.5% following treatment with SCBs and PCBs, respectively (OR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.36-9.44; P = 0.012). The mean angiography-derived fractional flow ratio at follow-up was 0.86 +/- 0.15 following treatment with SCBs and 0.91 +/- 0.09 following PCBs (P = 0.026); a fractional flow ratio <= 0.80 occurred in 13 and 5 vessels after treatment with SCBs and PCBs, respectively.CONCLUSIONS The SCB MagicTouch failed to demonstrate noninferiority for angiographic net lumen gain at 6 months compared to the PCB SeQuent Please Neo.Radiolog

Postthrombotic syndrome and quality of life after deep vein thrombosis in patients treated with edoxaban versus warfarin

International audienceBackground Postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) is a long-term complication after deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and can affect quality of life (QoL). Pathogenesis is not fully understood but inadequate anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonists is a known risk factor for the development of PTS. Objectives To compare the prevalence of PTS after acute DVT and the long-term QoL following DVT between patients treated with edoxaban or warfarin. Methods We performed a long-term follow-up study in a subset of patients with DVT who participated in the Hokusai-VTE trial between 2010 and 2012 (NCT00986154). Primary outcome was the prevalence of PTS, defined by the Villalta score. The secondary outcome was QoL, assessed by validated disease-specific (VEINES-QOL) and generic health-related (SF-36) questionnaires. Results Between 2017 and 2020, 316 patients were enrolled in 26 centers in eight countries, of which 168 (53%) patients had been assigned to edoxaban and 148 (47%) to warfarin during the Hokusai-VTE trial. Clinical, demographic, and thrombus-specific characteristics were comparable for both groups. Mean (SD) time since randomization in the Hokusai-VTE trial was 7.0 (1.0) years. PTS was diagnosed in 85 (51%) patients treated with edoxaban and 62 (42%) patients treated with warfarin (adjusted odds ratio 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.6). Mean differences in QoL scores between treatment groups were not clinically relevant. Conclusion Contrary to our hypothesis, the prevalence of PTS tended to be higher in patients treated with edoxaban compared with warfarin. No differences in QoL were observed. Further research is warranted to unravel the role of anticoagulant therapy on development of PTS

Proposal of the French Society of Vascular Medicine for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of venous thromboembolic disease in outpatients with COVID-19

International audienceThe proposal is intended to help physicians treating patients with COVID-19 for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolic disease either when leaving the hospital or treated as outpatients.This document is a synthesis of opinions of a working group from the French Society of Vascular Medicine (SFMV) composed of private practice and hospital-based physicians. This proposal is based on a limited level of evidence. This proposal is likely to evolve with the knowledge of the disease

Abstracts from Hydrocephalus 2016

[No abstract available