A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Single-Center Retrospective Review of Radiofrequency Wire Recanalization of Refractory Central Venous Occlusions. | LitMetric

Purpose: To retrospectively review the effectiveness and safety of radiofrequency (RF) wire recanalization of refractory central venous occlusions (CVOs) and compare recurrent and nonrecurrent CVOs in terms of patient and occlusion characteristics.

Materials And Methods: Twenty CVOs were treated in 18 patients (age 40 y ± 13; 9 women) with 11 superior vena cava (SVC) or brachiocephalic vein occlusions (ie, supradiaphragmatic) and 9 inferior vena cava or iliac vein occlusions (ie, infradiaphragmatic). Indications included pain, edema, ulceration, and/or dialysis arteriovenous fistula dysfunction peripheral to the CVO(s). All patients had multiple venous thrombotic risk factors, including mechanical venous compression, endothelial injury, and/or coagulopathies. CVO traversal was first attempted with standard and advanced techniques before RF wire recanalization and followed up with computed tomographic venography and clinic visits approximately 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment.

Results: Sixteen CVOs (80%) were successfully transversed and associated with symptom relief. One major complication occurred involving SVC perforation into the pericardial space. Primary CVO patency rate was 56% at a median follow-up of 14.1 months (interquartile range [IQR], 9.2-20.0 mo). Recurrent CVOs tended to be infradiaphragmatic (71% vs 12% for supradiaphragmatic; P = .02), longer (12.9 cm ± 10.0 vs 2.3 cm ± 1.3; P < .01), and associated with implanted venous stents, filters, or cardiac pacer/defibrillator leads (86% vs 22%; P = .01). Median time to restenosis/occlusion was 1.5 months (IQR, 1.1-6.1 mo).

Conclusions: RF wire recanalization is a relatively effective and safe option for refractory CVOs. Patients with longer, infradiaphragmatic CVOs associated with indwelling devices may require closer follow-up for CVO recurrence.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2018.06.017DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

wire recanalization
16
radiofrequency wire
8
recanalization refractory
8
refractory central
8
central venous
8
venous occlusions
8
cvos
8
vena cava
8
vein occlusions
8
cvos patients
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!