Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Trombólisis para la trombosis venosa profunda aguda

This is not the most recent version

Collapse all Expand all

References

References to studies included in this review

Arneson 1978 {published data only}

Arnesen H. The late results of treatment with streptokinase or heparin in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 1983;50(1):329‐Abstract No. 1039. CENTRAL
Arnesen H, Heilo A, Jakobsen E, Ly B, Skaga E. A prospective study of streptokinase and heparin in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Acta Medica Scandinavica 1978;203(6):457‐63. CENTRAL
Arnesen H, Hoiseth A, Ly B. Streptokinase of heparin in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Follow‐up results of a prospective study. Acta Medica Scandinavica 1982;211(1‐2):65‐8. CENTRAL

Common 1976 {published data only}

Common HH, Seaman AJ, Rosch J, Porter JM, Dotter CT. Deep vein thrombosis treated with streptokinase or heparin. Follow‐up of a randomized study. Angiology 1976;27(11):645‐54. CENTRAL
Porter JM, Seaman AJ, Common HH, Rosch J, Eidemiller LR, Calhoun AD. Comparison of heparin and streptokinase in the treatment of venous thrombosis. American Surgeon 1975;41(9):511‐9. CENTRAL
Rosch J, Dotter CT, Seaman AJ, Porter JM, Common HH. Healing of deep venous thrombosis: venographic findings in a randomized study comparing streptokinase and heparin. American Journal of Roentgenology 1976;127(4):553‐8. CENTRAL
Seaman AJ, Common HH, Rosch J, Dotter CT, Porter JM, Lindell TD, et al. Deep vein thrombosis treated with streptokinase or heparin. A randomized study. Angiology 1976;27(10):549‐56. CENTRAL

Elliot 1979 {published data only}

Elliott MS, Immelman EJ, Jeffery P, Benatar SR, Funston MR, Smith JA, et al. A comparative randomized trial of heparin versus streptokinase in the treatment of acute proximal venous thrombosis: an interim report of a prospective trial. British Journal of Surgery 1979;66(12):838‐43. CENTRAL

Elsharawy 2002 {published data only}

Elsharawy M, Elzayat E. Early results of thrombolysis vs anticoagulation in iliofemoral venous thrombosis. A randomised clinical trial. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery 2002;24(3):209‐14. CENTRAL

Enden 2011 {published data only}

Enden T, Haig Y, Holme G. 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):31‐8. CENTRAL
Enden T, Klow NE, Sandvik L, Slagsvold CE, Ghanima W, Hafsahl G, et al. Catheter‐directed thrombolysis vs. anticoagulant therapy alone in deep vein thrombosis: results of an open randomized, controlled trial reporting on short‐term patency. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2009;7(8):1268‐75. CENTRAL
Enden T, Sandvik L, Klow NE, Hafsahl G, Holme PA, Holmen LO, et al. Catheter‐directed Venous Thrombolysis in acute iliofemoral vein thrombosis‐the CaVenT Study: rationale and design of a multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical trial (NCT00251771). American Heart Journal 2007;154(5):808‐14. CENTRAL
Enden TR, Haig Y, Kløw NE, Slagsvold CE, Sandvik L, Ghanima W, et al. Improved functional outcome after additional catheter‐directed thrombolysis for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis: results of a randomized controlled clinical trial (the CaVenT study). Blood 2011;118(21):LBA‐1. CENTRAL
Enden TR, Resch S, White C, Wik HS, Klow NE, Sandset PM. Cost‐effectiveness of additional catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2013;11:442. CENTRAL
Enden TR, Resch S, White C, Wik HS, Klow NE, Sandset PM. Health‐related quality of life after catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis: Secondary outcomes of the randomised, non‐blinded, parallel‐group CaVenT study. BMJ Open 2013;3(8):e002984. CENTRAL
Enden TR, Slagsvold CE, Klow NE, Sandset PM. Additional catheter‐directed venous thrombolysis in iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis; short‐term results from the cavent study, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis2009; Vol. 7 Suppl 2:Abstract no: AS‐MO‐007. CENTRAL
Enden TR, Slagsvold CE, Klow NE, Sandset PM. Adjunctive catheter‐directed venous thrombolysis in iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis; short‐term results from the CaVenT study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial [Abstract No. 989]. Blood 2008;112(11):365. CENTRAL
Enden TR, Wik HS, Kvam AK, Haig Y, Klow NE, Sandset PM. Health‐related quality of life after catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis; from the CaVenT study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2013;11:29‐30. CENTRAL
Haig Y, Enden T. Additional catheter‐directed thrombolysis for high proximal deep vein thrombosis; 5 year results of a randomized controlled trial (the CaVenT Study). Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2015; Vol. 13:49. CENTRAL
Haig Y, Enden T, Grøtta O, Kløw NE, Slagsvold CE, Ghanima W, et al. Post‐thrombotic syndrome after catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis (CaVenT): 5‐year follow‐up results of an open‐label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Haematology 2016;3(2):e64‐e71. CENTRAL
Haig Y, Enden T, Slagsvold CE, Sandvik L, Sandset P, Kløw NE. Residual rates of reflux and obstruction and their correlation to post‐thrombotic syndrome in a randomized study on catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis. Journal of Vascular Surgery and Venous Lymphatic Disorders 2014;2(2):123‐30. CENTRAL
Haig Y, Enden T, Slagsvold CE, Sandvik L, Sandset PM, Klow NE, et al. Five‐year outcome after catheter‐directed thrombolysis for upper femoral and/or iliac vein thrombosis: results of a randomized controlled trial (the CaVenT Study). Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology. 2016; Vol. 38:S193. CENTRAL
Haig Y, Enden T, Slagsvold CE, Sandvik L, Sandset PM, Kløw NE. Determinants of early and long‐term efficacy of catheter‐directed thrombolysis in proximal deep vein thrombosis. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology 2013;24:17‐24. CENTRAL
NCT00251771. CaVenT: Catheter‐directed venous thrombolysis in acute iliofemoral vein thrombosis‐‐the CaVenT study: rationale and design of a multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical trial (NCT00251771). http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00251771?order=1 2007 (accessed 21 June 2016). CENTRAL
Sandset PM. Catheter‐directed thrombolysis reduced the postthrombotic syndrome in acute iliofemoral DVT. Annals of Internal Medicine 2012;156(12):31‐8. CENTRAL

Goldhaber 1990 {published data only}

Goldhaber SZ, Meyerovitz MF, Green D, Vogelzang RL, Citrin P, Heit J, et al. Randomized controlled trial of tissue plasminogen activator in proximal deep venous thrombosis. American Journal of Medicine 1990;88(3):235‐40. CENTRAL
Green D, Goldhaber S, Meyerovitz MF, Citrin P, Vogelzang R, Heit J, et al. A multicenter trial of recombinant human tissue‐type plasminogen activator (Activase) in proximal deep vein thrombosis. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 1989;62(1):406‐Abstract No 1289. CENTRAL

Goldhaber 1996 {published data only}

Goldhaber SZ, Hirsch DR, MacDougall RC, Polak JF, Creager MA. Bolus recombinant urokinase versus heparin in deep venous thrombosis: a randomized controlled trial. American Heart Journal 1996;132(2 Pt 1):314‐8. CENTRAL

Kakkar 1969 {published data only}

Kakkar VV. Results of streptokinase therapy in deep venous thrombosis. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1973;Suppl:60‐4. CENTRAL
Kakkar VV, Flanc C, Howe CT, O'Shea M, Flute PT. Treatment of deep vein thrombosis. A trial of heparin, streptokinase and arvin. British Medical Journal 1969;1(647):806‐10. CENTRAL
Kakkar VV, Flanc C, O'Shea M, Flute P, Howe CT, Clarke MB. Treatment of deep‐vein thrombosis ‐ a random trial. British Journal of Surgery 1968;55(11):858. CENTRAL
Kakkar VV, Howe CT, Laws JW, Flanc C. Late results of treatment of deep vein thrombosis. British Medical Journal 1969;1(5647):810‐1. CENTRAL

Kiil 1981 {published data only}

Kiil J, Carvalho A, Sakso P, Nielsen HO. Urokinase or heparin in the management of patients with deep vein thrombosis?. Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica 1981;147(7):529‐32. CENTRAL

Marder 1977 {published data only}

Marder VJ, Soulen RL, Atichartakarn V, Budzynski AZ, Parulekar S, Kim JR, et al. Quantitative venographic assessment of deep vein thrombosis in the evaluation of streptokinase and heparin therapy. Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine 1977;89(5):1018‐29. CENTRAL

Schulman 1986 {published data only}

Schulman S, Granqvist S, Juhlin‐Dannfelt A, Lockner D. Long‐term sequelae of calf vein thrombosis treated with heparin or low‐dose streptokinase. Acta Medica Scandinavica 1986;219(4):349‐57. CENTRAL

Schweizer 1998 {published data only}

Schweizer J, Elix H, Altmann E, Hellner G, Forkmann L. Comparative results of thrombolysis treatment with rt‐PA and urokinase: a pilot study. VASA 1998;27(3):167‐71. CENTRAL

Schweizer 2000 {published data only}

Schweizer J, Kirch W, Koch R, Elix H, Hellner G, Forkmann L, et al. Short‐ and long‐term results after thrombolytic treatment of deep venous thrombosis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2000;36(4):1336‐43. CENTRAL

Tsapogas 1973 {published data only}

Tsapogas MJ, Peabody RA, Wu KT, Karmody AM, Devaraj KT, Eckert C. Controlled study of thrombolytic therapy in deep vein thrombosis. Surgery 1973;74(6):973‐84. CENTRAL

Turpie 1990 {published data only}

Hirsh J. Thrombolytic therapy for venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 1989;62(1):547‐Abstract No 1739. CENTRAL
Turpie AG, Levine MN, Hirsh J, Ginsberg JS, Cruickshank M, Jay R, et al. Tissue plasminogen activator (rt‐PA) vs heparin in deep vein thrombosis. Results of a randomized trial. Chest 1990;97(4 Suppl):172S‐5S. CENTRAL

Ugurlu 2002 {published data only}

Ugurlu B, Kazaz H, Oto O, Hazan E, Sariosmanolu N. Low dose systemic thrombolytic therapy for treatment of deep venous thrombosis. Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2002;43(6):881‐5. CENTRAL

Verhaeghe 1989 {published data only}

Verhaeghe R, Besse P, Bounameaux H, Marbet GA. Multicenter pilot study of the efficacy and safety of systematic rt‐PA administration in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremities and/or pelvis. Thrombosis Research 1989;55(1):5‐11. CENTRAL

References to studies excluded from this review

Ansell 1990 {published data only}

Ansell JE, Repice NI, Klassen VA. Treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) with a 5‐day low‐dose infusion of tissue plasminogen activator (rt‐PA). Arteriosclerosis 1990;10:937A. CENTRAL

Bashir 2014 {published data only}

Bashir R. Comparative outcomes of catheter‐directed thrombolysis plus anticoagulation vs anticoagulation alone to treat lower‐extremity proximal deep vein thrombosis. JAMA Internal Medicine 2014;174(9):1494‐501. CENTRAL

Bieger 1976 {published data only}

Bieger R, Boekhout‐Mussert RJ, Hohmann F, Loeliger EA. Is streptokinase useful in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis?. Acta Medica Scandinavica 1976;199(1‐2):81‐8. CENTRAL

Browse 1968 {published data only}

Browse NL, Thomas ML, Pim HP. Streptokinase and deep vein thrombosis. British Medical Journal 1968;3(5620):717‐20. CENTRAL

Cakir 2014 {published data only}

Cakir V, Gulcu A, Akay E, Capar AE, Gencpinar T, Kucuk B, et al. Use of percutaneous aspiration thrombectomy vs. anticoagulation therapy to treat acute iliofemoral venous thrombosis: 1‐year follow‐up results of a randomised, clinical trial. Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology 2014;37(4):969‐76. CENTRAL

Engelberger 2015 {published data only}

Engelberger RP, Spirk D, Willenberg T, Alatri A, Do DD, Baumgartner I, et al. Ultrasound‐assisted versus conventional catheter‐directed thrombolysis for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions 2015;8:e002027. CENTRAL

Johansson 1979 {published data only}

Johansson L, Nylander G, Hedner U, Nilsson IM. Comparison of streptokinase with heparin: late results in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis. Acta Medica Scandinavica 1979;206(1‐2):93‐8. CENTRAL

Marini 1991 {published data only}

Marini M, Tovar E, Batlle J, Rodriquez E, Beraza A, Cachaza FF, et al. Local venous thrombolysis in eighty‐two cases: New treatment approaches. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 1991;65(6):1132‐Abstract No 1573. CENTRAL

Markevicius 2004 {published data only}

Markevicius N, Apanavicius G, Scerbinskas S. Comparison between long‐term results of catheter‐directed thrombolysis and anticoagulation in the treatment of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis. Phlebology 2004;19(3):148‐9. CENTRAL

Patra 2014 {published data only}

Patra S. Catheter directed thrombolysis along with mechanical thromboaspiration versus anticoagulation alone in the management of lower limb deep venous thrombosis ‐ a comparative study. Journal of American College Cardiology 2014;64(16 Suppl 1):C203. CENTRAL

Persson 1977 {published data only}

Persson AV, Foti CE, Pierce LE, Sower ND. Role of streptokinase in treatment of venous thrombosis. Thrombosis et Diathesis Haemorrhagica 1977;38(1):298. CENTRAL

Pinto 1997 {published data only}

Pinto A, Corrao S, Galati D, Arnone S, Licata A, Parrinello G, et al. Sulodexide versus calcium heparin in the medium‐term treatment of deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs. Angiology 1997;48(9):805‐11. CENTRAL

Robertson 1967 {published data only}

Robertson BR, Nilsson IM, Nylander G. Thrombolytic effect of streptokinase as evaluated by phlebography of deep venous thrombi of the leg. Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica 1970;136(3):173‐80. CENTRAL
Robertson BR, Nilsson IM, Nylander G. Value of streptokinase and heparin in treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis. A coded investigation. Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica 1968;134(3):203‐8. CENTRAL
Robertson BR, Nilsson IM, Nylander G, Olow B. Effect of streptokinase and heparin on patients with deep venous thrombosis. A coded examination. Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica 1967;133(3):205‐15. CENTRAL

Santiago 2014 {published data only}

Santiago MJ, Lopez‐Herce J, Del Castillo DB. Thrombolytic therapy using a low dose of tissue plasminogen activator in children. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2014;83(2):339‐40. CENTRAL

Sas 1985 {published data only}

Sas G, Peto I. Late results of streptokinase/heparin treatment in deep venous thrombosis. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 1985;54(1):174‐Abstract No 01030. CENTRAL

Schweizer 1996 {published data only}

Schweizer J, Spranger CH, Henkel A, Nirade A, Kaulen R, Altmann E. Long‐term outcome after venous thrombolysis with rt‐PA and urokinase [Langzeitergebnisse nach venoser thrombolyse mit rt‐PA und urokinase]. Phlebologie 1996;25(5):173‐6. CENTRAL

Silistreli 2004 {published data only}

Silistreli E, Bekis R, Serbest O, Arslan G, Ulker O, Catalyurek H, et al. Platelet scintigraphy results of heparin versus streptokinase treatment in acute deep vein thrombosis. Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal 2004;38(6):380‐2. CENTRAL

Sui 2013 {published data only}

Sui SG, Wang SL, Sun P, Xiao Y, Shi HF. Catheter‐directed thrombolytic therapy with use of reteplase and urokinase for the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis of lower extremity: an observation of clinical results. Journal of Interventional Radiology 2013;22(1):57‐60. CENTRAL

Tibbutt 1974 {published data only}

Tibbutt DA, Williams EW, Walker MW, Chesterman CN, Holt JM, Sharp AA. Controlled trial of ancrod and streptokinase in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis of lower limb. British Journal of Haematology 1974;27(3):407‐14. CENTRAL

Tibbutt 1977 {published data only}

Tibbutt DA, Chesterman CN, Williams EW, Faulkner T, Sharp AA. Controlled trial of the sequential use of streptokinase and ancrod in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis of lower limb. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 1977;37(2):222‐32. CENTRAL

TORPEDO 2012 {published data only}

Sharifi M, Bay C, Mehdipour M, Sharifi J. Thrombus obliteration by rapid percutaneous endovenous intervention in deep venous occlusion (TORPEDO) trial: Midterm results. Journal of Endovascular Therapy 2012;2:273‐80. CENTRAL
Sharifi M, Mehdipour M, Bay C, Smith G, Sharifi J. Endovenous therapy for deep venous thrombosis: the TORPEDO trial. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2010;76(3):316‐25. CENTRAL

Zhang 2014 {published data only}

Zhang X, Ren Q, Jiang X, Sun J, Gong J, Tang B, et al. A prospective randomized trial of catheter‐directed thrombolysis with additional balloon dilatation for iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis: a single‐center experience. Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology 2014;37(4):958‐68. CENTRAL

Zimmermann 1986 {published data only}

Zimmermann R, Epping J, Rasche H, Krzywanek HJ, Breddin K, Rudolph T, et al. Urokinase and streptokinase treatment of deep venous thrombosis. Results of a randomized study. Haemostasis 1986;16 Suppl 5:9. CENTRAL

IRCT201108035625N3 {published data only}

IRCT201108035625N3. Comparing the effect of conventional therapy (Heparin followed by warfarin) with interventional therapy (thrombolysis with or without angioplasty and stenting) on venous patency in patients who admitted with acute iliofemoral DVT in Tehran Heart Center Emergency Department. Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (accessed 11 June 2015). CENTRAL

NCT00790335 {published data only}

Comerota AJ. The ATTRACT trial: rationale for early intervention for iliofemoral DVT. Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy 2009;21(4):221‐4. CENTRAL
Vedantham S, Goldhaber SZ, Kahn SR, Julian J, Magnuson E, Jaff MR, et al. Rationale and design of the ATTRACT Study: A multicenter randomized trial to evaluate pharmacomechanical catheter‐directed thrombolysis for the prevention of postthrombotic syndrome in patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis. American Heart Journal 2013;165(4):523‐30. CENTRAL

NCT00970619 {published data only}

DUTCH CAVA‐trial. Ultrasound accelerated catheter‐directed thrombolysis for primary iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (IFDVT) compared to non‐invasive conventional anticoagulant therapy alone: a Dutch randomized controlled multicenter clinical trial. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00970619 (accessed 11 June 2015). CENTRAL
Strijkers RHW, Ten Cate‐Hoek AJ, Prins MH, Ten CH, Wittens CHA. Design of the catheter directed thrombolysis and anticoagulation therapy vs. anticoagulation alone; The Dutch cava‐study; Multicenter randomized controlled trial. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2011;9:190‐1. CENTRAL

Atkins 2004

Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck‐Ytter Y, Flottorp S, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328(7454):1490‐4.

Brandjes 1997

Brandjes DP, Buller HR, Heijboer H, Huisman MV, de Rijk M, Jagt H, et al. Randomised trial of effect of compression stockings in patients with symptomatic proximal‐vein thrombosis. Lancet 1997;349(9054):759‐62.

Browse 1999

Browse NL, Burnand KG, Lea Thomas M. Deep vein thrombosis: pathology, diagnosis and treatment. In: Browse NL, Burnand KG, Irvine AT, Wilson NM editor(s). Diseases of the veins. 2nd Edition. London: Edward Arnold, 1999:443‐74.

Comerota 2008

Comerota AJ, Gravatt MH. Current status of thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis. Phlebolymphology 2008;15(3):85‐93.

Dakin 2014

Dakin H, Devlin H, Parkin D, Rice N. NICE's cost‐effectiveness threshold. https://www.herc.ox.ac.uk/research/nhs‐uk‐healthcare‐system/studies/nice2019s‐cost‐effectiveness‐threshold (accessed 20 September 2016).

Du 2015

Du GC, Zhang MC, Zhao JC. Catheter‐directed thrombolysis plus anticoagulation versus anticoagulation alone in the treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis: a meta‐analysis. Vasa European Journal of Vascular Medicine 2015;44(3):195‐22.

Enden 2012

Enden T, Haig Y, Holme G. 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):31‐8.

Enden 2013a

Enden T, Wik HS, Kvam AK, Haig Y, Kløw NE, Sandset PM. Health‐related quality of life after catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis: Secondary outcomes of the randomised, non‐blinded, parallel‐group CaVenT study. BMJ Open 2013;3(8):e002984.

Enden 2013b

Enden TR, Resch S, White C, Wik HS, Klow NE, Sandset PM. Cost‐effectiveness of additional catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2013;11(6):1032‐42.

Haig 2016

Haig Y, Enden T, Grøtta O, Kløw NE, Slagsvold CE, Ghanima W, et al. Post‐thrombotic syndrome after catheter‐directed thrombolysis for deep Vein thrombosis (CaVenT): 5‐year follow‐up results of an open‐label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Haematology 2016;3(2):e64‐e71.

Higgins 2011

Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC (editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Jadad 1996

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Controlled Clinical Trials 1996;17(1):1‐12.

Johnson 1995

Johnson BF, Manzo RA, Bergelin RO, Strandness DE. Relationship between changes in the deep venous system and the development of the postthrombotic syndrome after an acute episode of lower limb deep vein thrombosis: a one‐to six‐year follow‐up. Journal of Vascular Surgery 1995;21(2):307‐12.

Kahn 2004

Kahn SR, Ginsberg JS. Relationship between deep venous thrombosis and the postthrombotic syndrome. Archives of Internal Medicine 2004;164:17–26.

Kahn 2006

Kahn SR. The post‐thrombotic syndrome: progress and pitfalls. British Journal of Haematology 2006;134:357‐65. [doi:10.1111/j.1365‐2141.2006.06200.]

Kahn 2008

Kahn SR, Shrier I, Julian JA, Ducruet T, Arsenault L, Miron M, et al. Determinants and time course of the post thrombotic syndrome after acute deep venous thrombosis. Annals of Internal Medicine 2008;149:698‐707. [DOI: doi:10.7326/0003‐4819‐149‐10‐200811180‐00004]

Kearon 2016

Kearon C, Akl EA, Ornelas J, Blaivas A, Jimenez D, Bounameaux H, et al. Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report. Chest 2016;149(2):315‐52.

NICE 2012

National Clinical Guideline Centre. Venous thromboembolic diseases: the management of venous thromboembolic diseases and the role of thrombophilia testing. Clinical Guideline. Methods, evidence and recommendations. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg144/evidence/cg144‐venous‐thromboembolic‐diseases‐full‐guideline3 (accessed 20 September 2016).

NICE guidelines CG144

National institute for Health and Care Excellence. Venous thromboembolic diseases: diagnosis, management and thrombophilia testing. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg144/evidence (accessed 15 September 2016).

NICE PMG9

NICE Appraisal Committee. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal (PMG9). https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/chapter/the‐reference‐case (accessed 20 September 2016).

Patterson 2010

Patterson BO, Hinchcliffe R, Loftus IM, Thompson MM, Holt PJE. DVT: a new era in anticoagulant therapy. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology 2010;30:669‐74.

Schulman 2006

Schulman S, Lindmarker P, Holmström M, Lärfars G, Carlsson A, Nicol P, et al. Post‐thrombotic syndrome, recurrence, and death 10 years after the first episode of venous thromboembolism treated with warfarin for 6 weeks or 6 months. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2006;4(4):734‐42.

Schultz 1995

Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995;273(5):408‐12.

Vedantham 2010

Vedantham S. Catheter directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis. Current Opinion Haematology 2010;17(5):464‐8.

White 2006

White RH. The epidemiology of venous thromboembolism. Circulation 2003;107(23):14‐8.

References to other published versions of this review

Armon 2000

Armon MP, Michaels JA. Thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2000, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002783]

Watson 2004

Watson L, Armon MP. Thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002783.pub2]

Watson 2010

Watson L, Armon MP. Thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002783.pub2]

Watson 2014

Watson L, Broderick C, Armon MP. Thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002783.pub3]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Arneson 1978

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation: 1

Loss to follow‐up: nil

Participants

Country: Norway

Participants: 43

Age: < 70 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: inpatients with venographically confirmed DVT extending proximally beyond the calf < 5 days duration

Exclusion criteria: bleeding dysfunction; surgery within 7 days; GI/GU bleeding; stroke; diastolic BP > 120 mmHg; hypertensive retinopathy grade 3 ‐ 4; renal/hepatic insufficiency; pregnancy; malignancy; age > 70

Interventions

Treatment: streptokinase 250,000 U loading IV, then 100,000 IU/hour IV 72 ‐ 96 hours

Control: heparin 15,000 IU IV bolus, 30,000 IU infusion IV 72 ‐ 90 hours

Co‐treatment: hydrocortisone 100 mg IV, then prednisolone 10 mg three times daily during streptokinase infusion. Warfarin begun after streptokinase along with heparin until warfarin effective

In control group, warfarin begun after 72 ‐ 90 hours with continuation of heparin until warfarin effective

Outcomes

21 days: mortality; PE; major bleeding; clot lysis

6 years: mortality; recurrent DVT; post‐thrombotic syndrome; leg ulceration

Notes

40 randomised, 1 excluded as diagnosis of DVT in error
3 patients included who were not randomised, 2 streptokinase, 1 control

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"...performed by our statistician on the basis of random numbers"

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

" ...allocation to the treatment groups was performed by using sealed envelopes"

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

not possible due to intervention but judged low risk as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"the radiologic evaluation was done without knowledge of the treatment given"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Common 1976

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation: nil

Losses to follow‐up: 23 at 7 months

Participants

Country: USA

Participants: 50

Age: > 18 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: venographically confirmed DVT duration < 14 days

Exclusion criteria: pregnancy; surgery or childbirth < 10 days; bleeding dysfunction; peptic ulcer; recent streptococcal infection; active TB; carotid bruit; stroke < 6 months; diastolic BP > 100 mmHg; atrial fibrillation; hypertensive retinopathy grade 3/4; hepatic/renal biopsy aortography < 14 days

Interventions

Treatment: hydrocortisone 100 mg IV then streptokinase IV 250,000 U over 30 minutes, then 100,000 U/hour titrated for 72 hours. Followed by IV heparin titrated over 7 days

Control: IV heparin 150 U/kg loading dose then titrated for 10 days

Co‐treatment: warfarin given from day 6 ‐ 7

Outcomes

3 ‐ 10 days: clot lysis; bleeding; stroke; mortality

7 months: clot lysis

Notes

Did not specify whether arm vein thrombosis included or not

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

stated "randomized" but no further details given

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

not described but judged as low risk of bias as outcome assessment blinding described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"..two radiologists who were unaware of the patient's treatment were evaluated the venograms..."

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Elliot 1979

Methods

A prospective, controlled, randomised, comparative study to compare conventional full dose heparin and streptokinase (Kabikinase)

Participants

Country: South Africa

Total randomised: 51 (strep 26, hep 25)

Sex: Male (17) and female (34)

Mean age hep group: 51 years; strep group: 48 years

Inclusion criteria: proximal vein thrombosis diagnosed by bilateral ascending phlebograph and less than 8 days clinical history of DVT

Exclusion criteria: any surgery within 7 days or neurosurgical within 2 months, pregnancy, menstruation, haemorrhagic diatheses, diastolic blood pressure of 110 mmHg, suspected or know bleeding lesions, cerebrovascular accident within 6 months, recent streptococcal infection, previous streptokinase therapy within 6 months, liver or renal disease

2 patients in strep group had axillary vein thrombosis

Interventions

Treatment: 100 mg of hydrocortisone 15 mins prior to first streptokinase dose and repeated 6 hourly for duration of strep treatment. Strepokinase (Kabikinase) loading dose of 600,000 U given by infusion over a period of 30 mins. Then 100,000 U hourly for 3 days by infusion pump. Then heparin for 4 days dose adjusted to maintain Lee‐White clotting time to at least 2.5 ‐ 3 normal

Control: At diagnosis 10,000 U of heparin given by iv injection. The 10,000 U iv 6 hourly using constant infusion pump. Dose adjusted to maintain Lee‐White clotting time to at least 2.5 ‐ 3 normal

Treatment continued for 7 days

30 mg warfarin given as a loading dose to both groups 36 hours before heparin therapy terminated, warfarin continued for 8 weeks, dose adjusted to maintain pro‐thrombin index 40 ‐ 60 per cent

All participants bed rest for duration, foot of bed raised by 60 cm, elastic support provided

Outcomes

Mortality, complete lysis, bleeding, PE, valve function, PTS symptoms 6‐33 months (mean 19 months)

Notes

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

no details given

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

no details given

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no details given but judged low risk as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"..all radiographs were assessed on a blind basis"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Elsharawy 2002

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation ‐ nil

Losses to follow‐up ‐ nil

Participants

Country: Egypt

Participants: 35

Age: < 70 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: iliofemoral venous thrombosis confirmed by duplex or venography duration < 10 days; life expectancy > 6 months

Exclusion criteria: surgery < 14 days; previous CVA/CNS disease; GI bleed < 1 year; BP > 180/100; pregnancy etc.; other contraindications to thrombolysis not explicitly described

Interventions

Treatment: catheter‐directed thrombolysis with streptokinase using popliteal approach. Pulse spray given then vein assessed using contrast every 15 minutes. In 1 hour 1 million U given. Followed by low dose infusion 100,000 U/hour, assessed every 12 hours. Stopped when complete lysis achieved, no progress in 12 hours or complication occurred. Followed by anticoagulation

Control: heparin IV bolus 5000 U, then adjusted continuous infusion. Warfarin begun the same evening

Co treatment: none described

Outcomes

1 week: clot lysis; bleeding; mortality; PE

6 months: clot lysis; venous function

Notes

Catheter‐directed thrombolysis, as distinct from systemic or loco‐regional

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"...computer designated cards assigning patients to either groups"

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

not mentioned

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

not possible due to intervention but judged low risk as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

" ..panel unaware of the sequencing of the studies or if images were obtained at baseline, 24 ‐ 48 hours after randomisation or before discharge"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

complete data available

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

pre‐specified outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Enden 2011

Methods

Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of additional catheter‐directed thrombolysis (CDT) with alteplase

Three years duration (January 2006 to January 2009)

Ethical approval obtained

Participants

Country: Recruited from 20 centres, 8 hospital trusts in Norway

Total randomised: 189

Age: 18 to 75 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: objectively verified (diagnostic imaging) first time DVT in the upper thigh, common iliac vein, or combined iliofemoral segment, symptom duration up to 21 days

Exclusion criteria: Anticoagulant treatment before trial entry (> 7 days previous), contraindications to thrombolytic treatment, indications for thrombolytic treatment, severe anaemia, thrombocytopenia, severe renal failure, sever hypertension, pregnancy or thrombosis within 7 days postpartum, less than 14 days postsurgery or post‐trauma, history of subarachnoid or intracerebral bleeding, disease with life expectancy less than 24 months, drug misuse or mental disease that could interfere with treatment and follow‐up, former ipsilateral proximal DVT, malignant disease needing chemotherapy, any thrombolytic treatment within 7 days before trial inclusion

Interventions

Treatment with CDT (number randomised 90)

Anticoagulation with subcutaneous LMWH (dalteparin or enoxaparin) for at least 5 days, discontinued for at least 8 hours before CDTreintroduced with warfarin 1 hour after procedure. Infusion catheter covering thrombosed segments introduced under ultrasound. 20 mg alteplase diluted 500 mL 0.9% NaCl given at 0.01 mg/kg per hr for a maximum 96 hrs. Maximum dose 20 mg/24 hrs. Unfractionated heparin given simultaneously as a continuous iv infusion, dose adjusted to keep activated partial thromboplastin time at 1.2 to 1.7 times higher than the upper normal limit. No additional antiplatelet treatment given. Use of adjunctive angioplasty and stents to establish flow and obtain less than 50% residual stenosis left to the discretion of the operator. Advised to wear knee high elastic compression stockings (class II) daily for 24 months

Control (number randomised 99)

Anticoagulation with subcutaneous LMWH (dalteparin or enoxaparin) and warfarin for at least 5 days, followed by warfarin alone to target intensity INR 2 to 3. Advised to wear knee high elastic compression stockings (class II) daily for 24 months

Outcomes

PTS at 6 and 24 months, and 5 years measured using Villalta score and classified as PTS if score 5 or over, or if venous ulcer present
Iliofemoral patency, graded daily during thrombolysis, 6 months and 24 months and 5 years

Bleeding complications defined as major if clinically overt, or haemoglobin decrease of 2 g per decilitre or more, transfusion of 2 or more units of red cells or whole blood, retroperitoneal or intracranial, occurred in a critical organ or contributed to death
Clinically relevant/non‐major bleeding: epistaxis requiring intervention, large visible haematoma on skin, spontaneous macroscopic haematuria

Venous function: at 6 months and 24 months, doppler ultrasound using pneumatic cuff with patient standing, standardised compression unit, venous incompetence with reflux valve closure time > 0.5 seconds

Functionally significant venous obstruction was indicated by a decline in the plethysmographic curve measured by APG (Macrola, Norway). Iliofemoral patency was defined as regained when flow in the pelvic and femoral vein and complete compressibility of the femoral vein was assessed by ultrasound; and no functional venous obstruction was indicated by APG

Recurrent VTE; verified with routine imaging at local trial site

Mortality at 24 months and 5 years

Health related quality of life: EQ‐5D measuring mobility, self care, activity, pain and anxiety at 6 month, 24 months and 5 years

VEINES QoL/Sym specific to lower limb problems, measures symptoms, limitation, psychological impact over 4 weeks and change over a year, carried out at 6 months, 24 months and 5 years. VEINES‐QOL assesses QoL and VEINES‐Sym measures symptom severity only

Cost effectiveness: Markov model, examining PTS, bleeding from CDT and post DVT states, costs in US$, third party payer and lifetime horizon. One way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis in hypothetical cohort age 50. Discounted costs and utilities 3% annually. Long term cumulative incidence after 8 years 30% PTS, 88% severe PTS. QALY, costs, incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio

Notes

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"...multi‐centre, open label, randomised controlled trial..". Random sequence generated with the website www.randomization.com

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

"...sealed opaque, numbered envelopes"

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

blinding of participants not possible due to the nature of the interventions, judged not to effect outcome as these very well defined

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

assessors had "no knowledge of patient history or treatment"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

well described. "Missing outcome data because of withdrawal of consent or death from cancer or other causes not related to CDT or anticoagulation were assumed to be missing independently of treatment and not included in the analyses"

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

other bias unlikely although we note that compliance with compression stockings is slightly higher in intervention group: 63% versus 52%

Goldhaber 1990

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation: nil

Losses to follow‐up: nil

Participants

Country: USA

Participants: 64 patients, 65 randomisations

Age: 18 to 75 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: venographically documented DVT, in popliteal or more proximal veins < 14 days duration

Exclusion criteria: major bleeding; bleeding dysfunction; stroke; head trauma < 3 months; GI/GU bleed < 4 weeks; trauma/surgery < 14 days; renal/hepatic dysfunction; therapeutic warfarin; lactation/pregnancy; low platelet count; contraindication to contrast agent

Interventions

Treatment (2 groups):
tPA alone 0.05 mg/kg/hour IV over 24 hours, then heparin 100U/kg bolus, then 1000 U/hour, adjusted

tPA as above plus heparin concomitantly as above

Control: heparin alone 100 U/kg bolus, then 1000 U/hour

Co‐treatment: warfarin begun in all groups on second day
Heparin adjusted in all groups

Outcomes

36 hours: clot lysis; bleeding

Notes

2 patients were not treated according to randomisation, one receiving tPA, one receiving heparin

5 of 65 venograms not analysed. 1 patient with recurrent DVT was re‐entered ‐ 64 patients 65 randomisations

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"randomly assigned to (groups) by opening the appropriate consecutively numbered sealed envelope according to a 2:2:1 allocation scheme. Seperate treatment assignments were generated block random number sequences"

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

open label trial

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"both patients and investigators knew which drug regimen was being utilized" but judged low risk as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"images compared and assessed by a vascular imaging panel that was blinded to randomization assignment and unaware of whether images were obtained at baseline, 24 to 48 hours after randomization or before discharge"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

all accounted for

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Goldhaber 1996

Methods

Randomised controlled trial to assess efficacy and safety of rUK compared to heparin alone

September 1992 to April 1994

361 screened, total randomised: 17

Allocation on 1:1 basis on morning of treatment

Open labelled study

Written informed consent

Participants

Country: USA
Participants: 17
Symptoms of DVT < 14 days
Age: > 18 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: DVT diagnosed by ultrasonography or venography for proximal lower extremity (popliteal,femoral, iliac veins with or without calf vein thrombosis) or MRI for upper extremity (brachial, axillary, subclavian, internal jugular veins)

Exclusion criteria: stroke, intracranial disease or trauma, major chronic bleeding, major GI bleeding within one year, major urological bleeding 1 month, trauma or major surgery at non‐compressible site within 14 days, hypertension > 180/110 mm Hg, haematocrit < 25% or platelet count < 100,000/mm3, pregnancy, nursing mothers, occult blood in stool, gross haematuria

Interventions

Recombinant urokinase group: 3 bolus infusions of 250,000 U in 5 mins via peripheral vein followed by continuous infusion of 750,000 U over 25 mins and 8 hours after initial dose. Final dose 24 hours after initial dose. Heparin administered 12 hours after first rUK dose for 12 hours until final rUK dose. Three hours after final rUK hep resumed to maintain activated PPT time of 60 to 80 seconds. Warfarin started the same evening to maintain INR of 2 to 3

Heparin group: initial bolus of 5000 to 10,000 U if they were not already receiving IV hep, then continuous infusion adjusted to maintain activated PPT time of 60 to 80 seconds. First dose of warfarin given within 24 hours of randomisation, target INR was 2 to 3

Outcomes

Clot lysis, venous flow, blood count and bleeding complications, fibrinogen levels

Notes

1 patient in each group had upper extremity DVT

UK group had longer duration of symptoms (6 days versus 3 days)

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

randomisation method not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

open label

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no details given but judged low risk as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"...images compared and assessed by vascular panel blinded to randomisation assignment and time point of image"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

all data reported

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Kakkar 1969

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation: 2
Losses to follow‐up: nil

Participants

Country: UK

Participants: 30

Age: 18 to 77 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: venographically confirmed DVT of leg duration < 4 days

Exclusion criteria: surgery < 3 days; unhealed wound; peptic ulcer; diastolic BP > 100 mmHg

Interventions

Treatment: (2 groups) streptokinase 500,000 U IV over 30 minutes, 900,000 U every 6 hours for 5 days or (Arwin) 80 U in 6 hours, then 80 units in 15 minutes, then 40 ‐ 80 U every 6 hours for 5 days

Control: heparin 10,000 U over 5 minutes, then 10,000 to 15,000 U every 6 hours for 5 days

Co‐treatment: oral anticoagulation commenced at end of infusions. Bed rest, leg elevation, bandages to all groups

Outcomes

1 month: mortality; PE; clot lysis; bleeding

6 to 12 months: clot lysis after partial lysis

Notes

1 excluded as died of PE in heparin group. 1 excluded due to bleeding in streptokinase group

Included 7 patients with tibial vein thrombosis only (4 heparin, 2 streptokinase, 1 Arwin)

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

description not clear

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

description not clear

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

High risk

not described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

High risk

not described

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Kiil 1981

Methods

Allocation: random

Double blind

Exclusions after randomisation: 1

Losses to follow‐up: nil

Participants

Country: Denmark

Participants: 20

Age: 17 to 79 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: venographically confirmed DVT duration < 72 hours

Exclusion criteria: not described

Interventions

Treatment: urokinase 200,000 U IV over 24 hours. After 18 hours, heparin loading dose of 15,000 units then 40,000 U/day for 5 days

Control: heparin 40,000 U/day IV for 6 days

Co‐treatment: not described

Outcomes

6 days: clot lysis; bleeding

2 weeks: mortality

Notes

1 excluded from heparin group due to bleeding. Low dose urokinase. Did not specify whether calf vein thrombosis was included

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"randomly separated" but no further details given

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"allocation of the patients ... was performed by one of the participants" no further details given

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"mixture of liquids to be infused was performed by one of the participants"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"clinical evaluation and interpretation of phlebograms were preformed in a double‐blind fashion"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

exclusions explained

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Marder 1977

Methods

Randomised controlled trial, single blind, "..to provide evidence that lytic agents are more effective than heparin in dissolving venous thrombi"

Declaration of Helsinki, written and verbal explanation of procedures and risks of study, written and informed consent

Participants

Country: USA
Participants: 24 randomised; 12 heparin and 12 strep (plus 3 non‐randomised)

Age over 18 years mean age in hep 50.2 and strep 54.7 years
Male and females with venographically proved peripheral DVT

Mean symptom duration in heparin group was 6.2 days and 8.5 days for the strep group

Patients were included in study if 'no evidence of hemorrhagic tendency, active gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding, severe system hypertension, atrial fibrillation, pregnancy, 10 days post partum, surgery, hepatic or renal biopsy, translumbar aortography. Four patients in strep group had tumours, three had obstructed venous return in veins which contained thrombus. Two patients (one each heparin and strep), had thrombosis of upper extremity

Interventions

All patients iv bolus injection of 100 mg hydrocortisone prior to start of strep or hep

Treatment: strep was administered as a priming dose of 250,000 U in 20 minute, followed by a maintenance infusion of 100,000 U/hour for 72 hours

Control: heparin was administered as an initial iv dose of 150 U/kg of body weight over 5 minutes followed by a 72 hour infusion at a rate which prolonged the PTT to 60 to 100 seconds

After 72 hours of treatment both groups received continuous or intermittent iv heparin according to guidelines. A maintenance dose of warfarin (coumadin) was administered on day seven and heparin was discontinued when the prothrombin time was prolonged to 1.5 to 2.5 times the control value. Warfarin was continued for three months or longer at physicians discretion

Outcomes

Venography (pre‐treatment and five days post treatment), haemostasis, complications

Notes

Three patients were added in a non‐randomised fashion to the streptokinase group. Mean age 56 years and symptom duration 8.7 days. These patients were added as three patients from the randomised group did not have follow‐up venograms

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"..after entry patients were randomly allocated to either the heparin or the streptokinase group..." but it is not clear by which method this was done

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

no information given

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no attempt to blind described but this judged low risk to be consistent with risk of bias assessing of other studies

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

for assessment of venography "films were interpreted independently (by two authors)...without knowing the drug administered or whether the study was before or after treatment". For bleeding no clear definition for grading or assessment are given

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

High risk

although possible to separate the non‐randomised data for venography, it is not possible to do so for bleeding outcomes

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

High risk

not possible to determine which results from randomised patients for all outcomes

Other bias

High risk

three non‐randomised patients added to study post‐randomisation

Schulman 1986

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation: 2

Losses to follow‐up: nil

Participants

Country: Sweden

Participants: 38

Age: 26 to 74 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: venographically confirmed calf vein thrombosis
duration < 7 days

Exclusion criteria: previous thrombosis same leg; contraindication to thrombolysis

Interventions

Treatment: streptokinase 50,000 IU IV over 15 minutes then 100,000 IU over 12 hours for up to 7 days, titrated. Given with 5000 IU heparin IV over 12 hours. Warfarin begun after streptokinase ended

Control: heparin 5000 IU IV bolus then 30,000 IU per day, titrated for 7 days. Warfarin begun simultaneously

Co‐treatment: paracetamol, hydrocortisone or moduretic if necessary. 24 hours bed rest. Warfarin given for 5 to 6 months. Leg elevation. Elastic bandages. Elastic stockings where swelling or venous insufficiency detected at discharge or follow‐up

Outcomes

1 week: bleeding; clot lysis (venographic score); mortality; stroke; PE

1 month: clot lysis

1 year: clot lysis

Up to 5 years: post‐thrombotic syndrome; foot volumetry

Notes

Low dose streptokinase. 2 patients excluded after randomisation, as they had previous thromboses

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"randomised, prospective study" but no further details given

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

"allocated using sealed envelopes"

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

not possible due to the nature of the interventions but judged low risk as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"..venograms were evaluated blindly in retrospect by one and the same radiologist"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Schweizer 1998

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation: 2

Losses to follow‐up: 1

Participants

Country: Germany

Participants: 69

Age: 22 to 58 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: venographically confirmed DVT of leg duration < 7 days

Exclusion criteria: PE; calf vein thrombosis; recurrent DVT; GI/GU bleed; inflammatory bowel disease; acute pancreatitis; surgery within 4 weeks; IM injection within 10 days; hypertensive retinopathy grade 3 or 4; intracerebral disease; cerebral surgery or trauma within 3 months; malignancy not in remission; diabetic retinopathy stage 3 or 4; renal or hepatic failure; bleeding dysfunction; pregnancy, lactation, delivery within 20 days

Interventions

Treatment: (2 groups) tPA 20 mg IV into pedal vein over 4 hours each day for 7 days. Heparin IV given concomitantly, with adjustment

Urokinase 100,000 IU/hr IV into pedal vein continuously for 7 days. Heparin IV for 7 days. Plasminogen monitored Warfarin from day 7 to 12 months

Control: heparin IV, adjusted for 7 days

Co‐treatment: bed rest and compression treatment. Warfarin from day 7‐ 12 months in treatment groups. Warfarin begun immediately, for 12 months in control group. Compression for 12 months for all patients

Outcomes

7 days: bleeding; clot lysis (no results for control group)

1 year: post‐thrombotic syndrome

Notes

Loco‐regional thrombolysis. 2 patients excluded due to bleeding, 1 tPA, 1 urokinase. 1 lost to follow‐up from control group

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"...designed by a biometrician who was not involved in the study"

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

no details

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

not described but judged unlikely to influence outcome assessment as well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"...evaluated by an independent radiologist who was unaware of the treatment the patients had received"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Schweizer 2000

Methods

Allocation: random

Single blind

Exclusions after randomisation: nil

Losses to follow‐up: 12

Participants

Country: Germany

Participants: 250

Age: mean 40 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: thrombosis of popliteal or more proximal veins confirmed by venogram at more than one level duration < 9 days

Exclusion criteria: no PE; recurrent DVT; calf vein thrombosis only; GI/GU bleeding; inflammatory bowel disease < 12 months; acute pancreatitis; surgery or head trauma < 3 months; IM injection < 10 days; hypertension; diabetic retinopathy stage 3 ‐ 4; malignancy; renal or hepatic failure; bleeding dysfunction; pregnancy, lactation, delivery within 20 days

Interventions

Treatment: (4 groups) local tPA 20 mg/day, over 4 hours via pedal vein for 4 to 7 days. IV heparin given simultaneously at 1000 IU/hour, adjusted

Local urokinase 100,000 IU/day infused continuously. Fibrinogen and plasminogen monitored. Heparin IV given concomitantly

Systemic streptokinase 3,000,000 U/day over 6 hours in conjunction with heparin for up to 7 days. Premedication: hydrocortisone 100 mg, ranitidine 50 mg, clemastine 2 mg

Systemic urokinase 5,000,000 IU/day over 4 hours for up to 7 days. IV heparin given concomitantly

Control: heparin IV, adjusted

Co‐treatment: bedrest, compression bandages, warfarin and compression treatment continued for 12 months

Outcomes

7 days: PE; major bleeding; mortality; clot lysis

1 year: clot lysis

Notes

4 losses to follow‐up in systemic urokinase, systemic streptokinase and control groups

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"patients were randomly assigned" no further details given

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

no details given

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

not described but judged low as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"..one dedicated radiologist, blinded to the patient' treatment regimens, evaluated the venograms, while another assessed the sonographic data"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Tsapogas 1973

Methods

Allocation: random

Not blind

Exclusions after randomisation: nil

Losses to follow‐up: nil

Participants

Country: USA

Participants: 34

Age: mean 57 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: DVT confirmed by venogram
duration < 5 days

Exclusion criteria: diastolic BP > 120 mmHg; peptic ulceration; bleeding dysfunction; allergic condition; surgery < 7 days; recent streptococcal infection; streptokinase given < 6 months

Interventions

Treatment: titrated dose of streptokinase IV into ankle vein 100 mg hydrocortisone IV prior to therapy and daily for 5 days. Streptokinase 100,000 U/hr maintained and adjusted up to 72 hours. IV heparin for 1 week 6 to 12 hours after streptokinase

Control: heparin IV into affected limb, 7000 U bolus then 1500 U/hr adjusted. Continued for 7 days after 48 hours of treatment

Co‐treatment: bed rest, elevation of leg. Warfarin 2 days before end of therapy, continued for 4 weeks

Outcomes

7 days: clot lysis

Notes

Loco‐regional administration of streptokinase and heparin

Calf vein thrombosis included, number not specified, equal in both groups

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"based on a list of random numbers"

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"arranged by using sealed envelopes"

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

not described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

High risk

not described

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

no missing data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Turpie 1990

Methods

Allocation: random

Double blind

Exclusions after randomisation: nil

Losses to follow‐up: 37

Participants

Country: Canada

Participants: 83

Age: < 75 years

Sex: not described

Inclusion criteria: venographically confirmed proximal DVT of lower limb
duration < 7 days

Exclusion criteria: bleeding dysfunction; active bleeding; peptic ulcer; stroke or intracranial process < 2 months; surgery, trauma, childbirth, biopsy, vessel puncture < 7 days

Interventions

Treatment: IV heparin 5000 U bolus then 30,000 U/24 hours, adjusted for 7 ‐ 10 days
Phase 1: two chain tPA 0.5 mg/kg IV over 4 hours
Phase 2: one chain tPA 0.5 mg/kg IV over 8 hours and repeated in 24 hours

Control: identical placebo to tPA depending on phase, plus heparin as above

Co‐treatment: warfarin commenced for 3 months

Outcomes

24 ‐ 48 hours: clot lysis; bleeding

3 years: post‐thrombotic syndrome

Notes

22 died, 15 "not available" for intermediate to late follow‐up

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"randomly allocated" no further details

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

not described clearly

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"identical appearing placebo"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"venograms interpreted by an independent panel without knowledge of the clinical findings or the treatment group"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

all reported

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Ugurlu 2002

Methods

Prospective study to compare efficacy and safety of low dose, slow infusion thrombolysis

Randomised

Participants

Country: Turkey

Age: 18 to 70 years

Number: 97, 50 low dose strep, 47 hep

June 1995 to May 1999
Sex: Male and female

Informed consent

Baseline characteristics similar

Inclusion criteria: DVT confirmed with high resolution colour duplex

Exclusion criteria: history of stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, major GI, urological ir genital haemorrhage, major trauma or surgery within 20 days, hypertension, known bleeding diathesis, post partum, nursing or pregnant women

Interventions

Strepokinase group: Methylprednisone 250 mg IV with IV antihistaminic prior to 250,000 U given in 30 mins via forearm vein, then infusion of 100,000 U/hour. Infusion stopped when a dose of 1,500,000 U. Then heparin according to prothrombin and partial thromboplastin times and duplex study done. Urokinase administered in 2 patients who had severe allergic reaction to strep ‐ bolus of 100,000 U then infusion of 100,000 U per hour for a total dose of either 1,500,000 or 3,000,000 U

Heparin group: bolus of 5000 U, then infusion of 1‐1500 U/hr. Dose adjusted according to the activated partial thromboplastin time

Both groups: bed rest and elevation, coumadin started 48 hours later according to prothrombin times, INR of 2 ‐ 3

Outcomes

Venous flow, clinical assessment, haemorrhagic complications, allergic reaction

Notes

Recurrent DVT included (30% each group)

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"randomised number table"

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

not mentioned

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

not possible but judged low risk as outcome assessment well described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"...initial and post‐treatment duplex studies preformed by same radiologist unaware of groups.."

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

all accounted for

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

Verhaeghe 1989

Methods

Allocation: random

Double blind

Exclusions after randomisation: nil

Losses to follow‐up: nil

Participants

Country: France, Belgium, Switzerland

Participants: 21 (in randomised phase only)

Age: 22 to 74 years

Sex: Male and female

Inclusion criteria: hospitalised patients with DVT of popliteal or more proximal veins of the lower leg, confirmed by venography
duration < 10 days

Exclusion criteria: pregnancy; major surgery < 72 hours; stroke < 6 months; head trauma < 1 month; diastolic BP > 120 mmHg; renal/hepatic disease; peptic ulcer; bleeding dysfunction; contraindication to heparin

Interventions

Treatment: (2 groups)

IV tPA 100 mg on day 1, 50 mg tPA on day 2. 10% of dose given as bolus

IV tPA 50 mg on day 1, repeated on day 2. 10% of dose given as bolus

Control:

identical placebo infusion as above

Co‐treatment: heparin 5000 U IV bolus then continuous infusion of 1000 U per hour for up to 72 hours

Outcomes

72 hours: clot lysis; bleeding

Notes

Included initial open label phase in some results (11 additional patients)

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

"randomly allotted" not described further

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

not clearly described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"double‐blind"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"Two radiologists interpreted all films without knowing the drug administered or whether the venography was before or after trial treatment"

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"no protocol violations"

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

all outcomes reported

Other bias

Low risk

none

BP: blood pressure
CDT: catheter‐directed thrombolysis
CNS: central nervous system
CVA: cerebrovascular accident
DVT: deep vein thrombosis
GI: gastrointestinal
GU: genitourinary
hep: heparin
Hg: mercury
IM: intramuscular
IU: international unit
PE: pulmonary embolism
strep: streptokinase
TB: tuberculosis
tPA: tissue plasminogen activator
U: unit

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Ansell 1990

Insufficient information despite contacting author

Bashir 2014

Not randomised

Bieger 1976

DVT not confirmed objectively

Browse 1968

Not randomised

Cakir 2014

Thrombectomy not thrombolysis

Engelberger 2015

Not CDT versus anticoagulant

Johansson 1979

Not truly randomised

Marini 1991

Both groups received thrombolysis

Markevicius 2004

Not truly randomised

Patra 2014

Included patients with DVT 0 ‐ 8 weeks, not clear if randomised, CDT in addition to thrombectomy

Persson 1977

Insufficient information, unable to contact author

Pinto 1997

No thrombolytic

Robertson 1967

Not truly randomised

Santiago 2014

Prospective observational clinical study in children only

Sas 1985

Insufficient information, unable to contact author

Schweizer 1996

Control group not randomised

Silistreli 2004

Included patients with symptoms for more than 21 days

Sui 2013

Compares thrombolytics, not CDT versus anticoagulant

Tibbutt 1974

Ancrod used as control

Tibbutt 1977

All patients received streptokinase

TORPEDO 2012

Only 33 out of 90 patients received thrombolysis

Zhang 2014

CDT verses CDT plus angioplasty

Zimmermann 1986

Both groups received thrombolysis

DVT: deep vein thrombosis

Characteristics of ongoing studies [ordered by study ID]

IRCT201108035625N3

Trial name or title

Traditional medical treatment versus interventional approach in acute iliofemoral vein thrombosis

Methods

Single centre randomised controlled clinical trial comparing the effect of conventional therapy (heparin followed by warfarin) with interventional therapy (thrombolysis with or without angioplasty and stenting) on venous patency in patients admitted with acute iliofemoral DVT to Tehran Heart Center emergency department

Participants

Patients with acute extensive iliofemoral venous thrombosis

Interventions

Intervention: lytic therapy will be achieved by placing a catheter in the contralateral femoral vein, the right internal jugular vein, or the ipsilateral popliteal vein for direct intra‐clot infusion. Streptokinase will be given as a loading dose of 250,000 units followed by infusion of 100,000 units per hour for 24 to 48 hours. Heparin will be administered concomitantly with the lytic therapy and continued until therapeutic anticoagulation with warfarin will be accomplished. After lytic therapy, further intervention (PTA/stenting) will be performed if there is an underlying venous stenosis of 50% or more. Stent placement will be done with appropriate selected stents (self‐expanding stainless steel wall stents). All stented patients will be given warfarin indefinitely (INR 2 – 3). Lysis will be considered complete if there is less than 5% residual thrombus

Control: conventional treatment will consist of intravenous heparin followed by warfarin. All patients will be treated with limb elevation and moist heat during their initial admission and maintained on prescription gradient compression stockings

Outcomes

Venous patency and symptom changes

Starting date

August 2011

Contact information

Dr Yaser Jenab Tehran Heart Center [email protected]

Notes

http://www.irct.ir/searchresult.php?keyword=&id=5625&number=3&prt=2274&total=10&m=1 (accessed 29/02/2016)

NCT00790335

Trial name or title

Acute Venous Thrombosis: Thrombus removal with adjunctive catheter‐directed thrombolysis (ATTRACT)

Methods

Optimal standard DVT therapy to standard plus CDT

Participants

Age 16 to 75 years old with symptomatic proximal DVT involving iliac, common femoral and or femoral vein

Interventions

Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt‐PA)

Outcomes

Incidence of post‐thrombotic syndrome 24 months after intervention; major bleeding

Starting date

November 2009

Contact information

Patty M Nieters [email protected]

Notes

NCT00790335

NCT00970619

Trial name or title

DUTCH CAVA‐trial: CAtheter Versus Anticoagulation Alone for Acute Primary (Ilio)Femoral DVT. (NL28394)

Methods

Study design: prospective, non blinded, randomised, controlled, multicentre, intervention study. To assess whether catheter directed thrombolytic therapy for the treatment of IFDVT can safely and effectively reduce post thrombotic morbidity after one year. The secondary objective is to study whether catheter directed thrombolytic intervention has a positive effect on the quality of life of patients with IFDVT and to assess late PTS

Participants

The study population includes all consecutive patients with IFDVT presenting at the emergency or outpatient departments of the participating centres. The thrombus should not be older than 14 days at randomisation

Interventions

After randomisation patients will be allocated to either conservative anticoagulant treatment or to catheter directed thrombolysis combined with conservative anticoagulant treatment

Outcomes

The primary efficacy outcome is the incidence of PTS at one year; a decline in PTS incidence from 25% to 8% is anticipated. The secondary outcome is the Health related Quality of life and late PTS during follow‐up. The principal safety outcome is major bleeding during anticoagulant therapy. Bleeding as well as events of recurrent thrombosis will be monitored. The patency of the venous system of the affected lower limb will be assessed as well as the percentage of clot lysis, after thrombolytic intervention. Additionally, measurements of markers of coagulation and inflammation will be performed during follow‐up

Starting date

May 2010

Contact information

Rob Strijkers, MD

Notes

NCT00970619

CDT: catheter‐directed thrombolysis
DVT: deep vein thrombosis
IFDVT: ileofemoral deep vein thrombosis
INR: international normalised ratio
PTA: percutaneous transluminal angioplasty
PTS: post‐thrombotic syndrome

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Any thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Any improvement in venous patency (early) Show forest plot

9

421

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.48 [1.35, 4.57]

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

2 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

8

592

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

4.91 [1.66, 14.53]

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

3 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

17

1103

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.23 [1.41, 3.52]

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

17

1103

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.92 [0.34, 10.86]

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

5 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

9

529

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.31, 1.89]

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

6 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

6

433

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.33, 3.05]

Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

3

306

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.66 [0.53, 0.81]

Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late) Show forest plot

2

211

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.45, 0.77]

Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

9 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

4

342

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.87 [0.16, 4.73]

Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

10 Leg ulceration (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).

11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

7

630

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.44 [1.40, 4.27]

Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

12 Complete clot lysis (late) Show forest plot

2

206

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

3.25 [0.17, 62.63]

Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).

13 Mortality (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

289

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.27, 3.43]

Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).

14 Mortality (late) Show forest plot

2

230

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.25, 1.50]

Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).

15 Normal venous function (intermediate) Show forest plot

3

255

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.18 [0.86, 5.54]

Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).

16 Recurrent DVT (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (intermediate).

Open in table viewer
Comparison 2. Systemic thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Any improvement in venous patency (early) Show forest plot

8

386

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.18 [1.28, 3.70]

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

2 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

7

457

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

4.37 [1.40, 13.61]

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

3 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

15

779

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.18 [1.37, 3.47]

Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

15

779

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.92 [0.34, 10.86]

Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

5 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

8

394

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.31, 1.89]

Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

6 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

5

298

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.73 [0.55, 5.40]

Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

117

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.30, 1.03]

Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

9 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

3

153

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.87 [0.16, 4.73]

Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

10 Leg ulceration (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.10

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).

11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

5

300

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.59 [1.27, 5.28]

Analysis 2.11

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

12 Complete clot lysis (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.12

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).

13 Mortality (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

189

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.27, 3.43]

Analysis 2.13

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).

14 Mortality (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.14

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).

15 Normal venous function (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.15

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).

16 Recurrent DVT (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.16

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (late).

Open in table viewer
Comparison 3. Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Complete clot lysis (early).

2 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

2

146

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.0 [0.46, 34.75]

Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Bleeding (early).

3 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

2

146

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

4 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Mortality (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Mortality (early).

5 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Pulmonary embolism (early).

6 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

7 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

8 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

139

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.25 [1.33, 3.80]

Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

9 Mortality (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Mortality (intermediate).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Mortality (intermediate).

Open in table viewer
Comparison 4. Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Any improvement in venous patency (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

2 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

3 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

2

224

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

7.69 [0.40, 146.90]

Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

5 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

6 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.7

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.8

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

9 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.9

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

10 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

224

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.52 [0.52, 12.17]

Analysis 4.10

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

11 Complete clot lysis (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.11

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (late).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (late).

12 Normal venous function (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

224

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.98 [1.75, 5.08]

Analysis 4.12

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Normal venous function (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Normal venous function (intermediate).

13 Recurrent VTE (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.13

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Recurrent VTE (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Recurrent VTE (intermediate).

14 Recurrent VTE (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.14

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Recurrent VTE (late).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Recurrent VTE (late).

15 Mortality (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.15

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Mortality (late).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Mortality (late).

Study flow diagram.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Any thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.10

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Leg ulceration (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.11

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.12

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Complete clot lysis (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.13

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Mortality (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.14

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Mortality (late).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.15

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Normal venous function (intermediate).

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.16

Comparison 2 Systemic thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 16 Recurrent DVT (late).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Complete clot lysis (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Bleeding (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Mortality (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Mortality (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Pulmonary embolism (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Leg ulceration (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Mortality (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Mortality (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 1 Any improvement in venous patency (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 2 Complete clot lysis (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 3 Bleeding (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 5 Mortality (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 6 Pulmonary embolism (early).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.7

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.8

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.9

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 9 Leg ulceration (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.10

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 10 Complete clot lysis (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.11

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 11 Complete clot lysis (late).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Normal venous function (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.12

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 12 Normal venous function (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Recurrent VTE (intermediate).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.13

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 13 Recurrent VTE (intermediate).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Recurrent VTE (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.14

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 14 Recurrent VTE (late).

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Mortality (late).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.15

Comparison 4 Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control, Outcome 15 Mortality (late).

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Treatment with any thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis

Treatment with any thrombolysis for acute DVT

Patient or population: patients diagnosed with acute DVT
Setting: hospital
Intervention: any thrombolysis
Comparison: control anti‐coagulation

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with control

Risk with any thrombolysis

Complete clot lysis (intermediate, 6 months to under 5 years after treatment)

Study population

RR 2.44 (1.4 to 4.27)

630
(7 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 1

78 (of 240) patients treated with standard anticoagulation had complete clot lysis compared to 198 (of 390) in the thrombolysis group

325 per 1000

793 per 1000 (455 to 1000)

Bleeding (early, up to 1 month after treatment)

Study population

RR 2.23
(1.41 to 3.52)

1103
(17 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 1

Although 17 studies reported on bleeding, these were small studies

43 per 1000

96 per 1000 (61 to 152)

Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate, 6 months to under 5 years after treatment)

Study population

RR 0.66
(0.53 to 0.81)

306
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 1

96 (of 146) patients treated with standard anticoagulation developed PTS compared to 72 (of 160) treated with thrombolysis

658 per 1000

434 per 1000 (348 to 533)

Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late, 5 year follow‐up after treatment)

Study population

RR 0.58
(0.45 to 0.77)

211
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 1

72 (of 107) patients treated with standard anticoagulation developed PTS compared to 41 (of 104) treated with thrombolysis

673 per 1000

390 per 1000 (303 to 518)

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: Confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PTS: post‐thrombotic syndrome RCT: randomised controlled trial; RR: Risk ratio

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 Downgraded by one level as the number of participants in each study is small

Figures and Tables -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Treatment with any thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis
Summary of findings 2. Treatment with catheter directed thrombolysis for acute deep venous thrombosis

Treatment with catheter directed thrombolysis for acute DVT

Patient or population: patients diagnosed with acute deep vein thrombosis
Setting: hospital
Intervention: catheter‐directed thrombolysis
Comparison: control anti‐coagulation

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with control

Risk with catheter directed thrombolysis

Complete clot lysis (intermediate, 6 months to under 5 years after treatment)

Study population

RR 2.52
(0.52 to 12.17)

224
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 1

58 (of 116) patients treated with standard anticoagulation had complete clot lysis compared to 81 (of 108) in the CDT group

Bleeding

(early, up to 1 month after treatment)

Study population

RR 7.69
(0.40 to 146.90)

224
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 2

None (of 116) patients in the standard anticoagulation group had bleeding complications compared to 3 (of 108) in the CDT group.

Cannot define risk as no events reported in the standard anticoagulation group

Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate, 6 months to under 5 years after treatment)

Study population

RR 0.74
(0.55 to 1.00)

189
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 3

55 (of 99) patients in the standard anticoagulation group developed PTS compared to 37 (of 90) in the CDT group.

556 per 1000

411 per 1000 (306 to 556)

Post‐thrombotic syndrome

(late, 5 year follow‐up after treatment)

Study population

RR 0.60
(0.45 to 0.79)

176
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 3

63 (of 89) patients in the standard anticoagulation group developed PTS compared to 37 (of 87) in the CDT group.

708 per 1000

425 per 1000 (319 to 559)

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CDT: catheter‐directed thrombolysis; CI: Confidence interval; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; PTS: post‐thrombotic syndrome; RCT: randomised controlled trial RR: Risk ratio

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 Downgraded by one level as confidence intervals are wide around the estimate of the effect
2 Downgraded by one level as confidence intervals wide around the estimate of effect. Studies did not report any bleeding events in standard anticoagulation group
3 Results are from one small study with a small number of events. Downgraded by one level

Figures and Tables -
Summary of findings 2. Treatment with catheter directed thrombolysis for acute deep venous thrombosis
Table 1. Level of affected leg veins in included studies

Study

Potential levels of leg vein included

Arneson 1978

proximal to calf

Common 1976

not specified

Elliot 1979

proximal

Elsharawy 2002

femoral and iliofemoral

Enden 2011

pelvic, iliofemoral, femoral

Goldhaber 1990

popliteal or more proximal

Goldhaber 1996

proximal

Kakkar 1969

not specified

Kiil 1981

not specified

Marder 1977

calf up to iliac vein

Schulman 1986

calf vein thrombosis only

Schweizer 1998

not specified

Schweizer 2000

popliteal or more proximal

Tsapogas 1973

not specified

Turpie 1990

proximal

Ugurlu 2002

popliteal up to inferior vena cava

Verhaeghe 1989

popliteal or more proximal

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Level of affected leg veins in included studies
Comparison 1. Any thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Any improvement in venous patency (early) Show forest plot

9

421

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.48 [1.35, 4.57]

2 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

8

592

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

4.91 [1.66, 14.53]

3 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

17

1103

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.23 [1.41, 3.52]

4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

17

1103

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.92 [0.34, 10.86]

5 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

9

529

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.31, 1.89]

6 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

6

433

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.33, 3.05]

7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

3

306

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.66 [0.53, 0.81]

8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late) Show forest plot

2

211

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.58 [0.45, 0.77]

9 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

4

342

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.87 [0.16, 4.73]

10 Leg ulceration (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

7

630

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.44 [1.40, 4.27]

12 Complete clot lysis (late) Show forest plot

2

206

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

3.25 [0.17, 62.63]

13 Mortality (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

289

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.27, 3.43]

14 Mortality (late) Show forest plot

2

230

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.25, 1.50]

15 Normal venous function (intermediate) Show forest plot

3

255

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.18 [0.86, 5.54]

16 Recurrent DVT (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Any thrombolysis versus control
Comparison 2. Systemic thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Any improvement in venous patency (early) Show forest plot

8

386

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.18 [1.28, 3.70]

2 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

7

457

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

4.37 [1.40, 13.61]

3 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

15

779

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.18 [1.37, 3.47]

4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

15

779

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.92 [0.34, 10.86]

5 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

8

394

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.31, 1.89]

6 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

5

298

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.73 [0.55, 5.40]

7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

117

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.30, 1.03]

8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

3

153

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.87 [0.16, 4.73]

10 Leg ulceration (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

11 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

5

300

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.59 [1.27, 5.28]

12 Complete clot lysis (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

13 Mortality (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

189

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.27, 3.43]

14 Mortality (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

15 Normal venous function (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

16 Recurrent DVT (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. Systemic thrombolysis versus control
Comparison 3. Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

2

146

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.0 [0.46, 34.75]

3 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

2

146

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

139

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.25 [1.33, 3.80]

9 Mortality (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. Loco‐regional thrombolysis versus control
Comparison 4. Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Any improvement in venous patency (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Complete clot lysis (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Bleeding (early) Show forest plot

2

224

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

7.69 [0.40, 146.90]

4 Stroke/intracerebral haemorrhage (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Mortality (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Pulmonary embolism (early) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8 Post‐thrombotic syndrome (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9 Leg ulceration (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

10 Complete clot lysis (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

224

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.52 [0.52, 12.17]

11 Complete clot lysis (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

12 Normal venous function (intermediate) Show forest plot

2

224

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.98 [1.75, 5.08]

13 Recurrent VTE (intermediate) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

14 Recurrent VTE (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

15 Mortality (late) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 4. Catheter‐directed thrombolysis versus control