Participants, methods, and results
Fifty three consecutive patients with a first, symptomatic deep vein thrombosis of the arm, confirmed by ultrasonography or venography—including six cases related to catheter insertion—were treated with high dose heparin, followed by at least three months of warfarin (targeted international normalised ratio 2.0-3.0) (table).
Characteristics of the study patients (n=53). Values are numbers (percentages) of patients unless otherwise indicated
Follow up visits were scheduled after three and six months, and then every six months up to five years. At each visit, patients underwent a clinical evaluation, for which we used a standardised scale previously validated in patients with venous thrombosis in the leg,3 4 and an ultrasound assessment of the affected venous segments. Each of five symptoms (heaviness, pain, itching, physical limitation, and paraesthesia) and six signs (pretibial oedema, skin induration, discoloration, venous ectasia, redness, and pain during compression) received a score ranging from 0 to 3. We defined post-thrombotic syndrome as severe in the case of a score higher than 14 and as mild in the case of a score of 5-14, on two consecutive examinations. We considered veins as recanalised if they measured less than 2.0 mm in diameter in a single examination or less than 3.0 mm in two consecutive examinations at least three months apart.
Symptomatic recurrent thrombosis in the same arm was diagnosed in case of a (new) intraluminal defect on venography, while symptomatic recurrences in other limbs were diagnosed in case the vein could not be compressed on ultrasonography.1 5
We used Kaplan-Meier estimates to assess the risk of recurrent thromboembolism and post-thrombotic syndrome. We used stepwise Cox regression models to calculate hazard ratios for these outcomes in relation to age, sex, extension of thrombosis (single spot versus axillary or subclavian involvement), modality of clinical presentation (idiopathic versus secondary), thrombophilic status, acquired risk factors of thrombosis, and persistent venous obstruction. All patients gave written informed consent.
Two patients were lost to follow up after two and three years, respectively, and 11 died because of cancer progression, pulmonary embolism, and congestive heart failure.1 Median follow up was 48.3 months.
Three patients developed a recurrent thromboembolism (recurrence in the same arm in two, and a thrombosis in the leg in one). The cumulative incidence of recurrent thromboembolism after one, two, and five years was 2.0% (95% confidence interval 0.0 to 5.9), 4.2% (0.0 to 9.9), and 7.7% (0.0 to 16.5), respectively. Thirteen patients developed post-thrombotic syndrome, one severely so. Ten cases occurred within six months, two after one year, and one after two years. The cumulative incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome was 20.8% (9.3 to 32.3) at six months, 25.1% (12.8 to 37.4) at one year, and 27.3% (14.6 to 40.0) at two years. It remained stable afterwards. The incidence of these outcomes in patients with and without vein catheter is shown in table A on bmj.com.
Residual thrombosis was related to the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (hazard ratio 4.0, 1.1 to 15.0). Of other potential risk factors, only thrombosis affecting the axillary and subclavian veins was related, albeit not significantly, to the development of post-thrombotic syndrome (hazard ratio 2.9, 0.8 to 10.7).
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27