ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical efficacy of catheter directed thrombolysis (CDT) through three different approaches combined with iliac venous endovascular therapy for acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) complicated with Cockett syndrome of the lower extremities. MethodThe clinical data of 87 patients with CDT through three different approaches (small saphenous vein group, popliteal vein group, and posterior tibial vein group) combined with iliac venous endovascular therapy for DVT complicated with Cockett syndrome of the lower extremities were analyzed retrospectively. ResultsThe lower extremity swelling of all the patients were disappeared obviously within 72 h after surgery, there was no death related surgery and pulmonary embolism. The limb edema reduction rates had no significant differences among the small saphenous vein group, popliteal vein group, and posterior tibial vein group﹝(77±13)% versus (82±12)% versus (77±18)%, P > 0.05﹞. The recanalization rates of thrombolysis had no significant differences among the above three groups﹝(86.5±10.6)% versus (92.0±7.7)% versus (87.3±7.8)%, P > 0.05﹞. The time required for the cannulation in the posterior tibial vein group was significantly shorter than that of the small saphenous vein group or popliteal vein group﹝(15.14±3.62) min versus (32.62±9.36) min or (42.79±13.30) min, P < 0.01﹞. All the patients were performed by balloon dilatation and iliac vein stenting. Eighty-seven cases were followed-up for 1-24 months, the primary patency rate of iliac venous was 100%. ConclusionsCDT with iliac venous endovascular therapy is an effective method in treatment of acute DVT with Cockett syndrome. CDT through posterior tibial vein is an easier and effective method with less complications and time. This way could be acceptable in basal hospital.
ObjectiveTo investigate clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement (AVR)for surgical treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS)and left ventricular dysfunction (LVD). MethodsClinical data of 29 patients with severe AS and LVD (left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 0.50)who underwent AVR in Changhai Hospital between January 2000 and December 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with mitral stenosis were excluded from this study. There were 22 male and 7 female patients with their age of 14-76 (56.3±12.9)years. Preoperative and postoperative clinical and echocardiographic findings were compared to assess AVR effects. Possible risk factors affecting postoperative recovery of left ventricular function were analyzed according to postoperative LVEF changes. ResultsOne patient died within 30 days after AVR. In the other 28 patients, postoperative aortic pressure gradient (APG)decreased from 97.6±25.1 mm Hg to 25.0±9.7 mm Hg, while LVEF increased from 41%±6% to 56%±11%. Postoperative left ventricular end-diastolic/systolic diameter/volume all significantly improved (all P < 0.001). ConclusionsAVR is an effective treatment for patients with severe AS and LVD. Left ventricular function improves significantly in most patients after AVR. Patients with a less dilated left ventricle may have a better LVEF recovery.