Analysis The Efficacy Of Implantation Vena Cava Filtercombined Thecathetering Thrombolysis Therapy In The Treatment Of Deep Venous Thrombosis Of Lower-limb

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical eficacy of implantation vena cava filterthecombined thecathetering thrombolysis therapy in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis oflower-limb．MethodsTotal64patients with deep venous thrombosis were treated in my hospital fromoctober2008to auguest2010.The patients were divided into experiment group(32cases)and control group(32cases).The experiment group of with DVT underwent inthe DSA implantation vena cava filters,intraluminal cathter-directed thrombolysiswith urokinase inpact and continuous infu sion.The control group were theated fromvenousthrombolysis therapy．ResultsFirst,After treatment, the cure rate of the treatment group is87.5%(28/32), thecontrol group was34.4%(10/32), the difference was significant (P<0.05).Second,Two studies have shown that the control group, symptoms ofpulmonary embolism incidence is15.6%(5/32), the treatment group does not appearone cases of symptomatic pulmonary embolism (0/32), symptomatic pulmonaryembolism rate in treatment group than in the control group insignificantly reduced.The two groups of patients have a significant difference (P <0.05).Third,Admission tothe hospital stay of discharged from the patient, the control group the averageduration of hospitalization was12±3.6days, the treatment group, the averagehospital stay was9±1.8days, the treatment group than the control group to shorten,the difference was significant (P <0.01).Fourth,Contrast to edema, pigmentation,chronic ulcers, deep vein patency rate of long-term effect than the control group ofpatients treated with chronic ulcers, pigmentation and the incidence of a slightdecrease, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05); edema of the control groupwas53.1%, edema of the treatment group was6%, the treatment group than thecontrol group decreased significantly, the difference was significant (P <0.01); treatment group of deep vein patency rate was88.9%in the control group of deepvein patency rate was34.4%, the difference was significant (P <0.01).Fifth,Measurement Kin suffering in patients with limb circumference differencecompared with before treatment significantly reduced after the treatment, thedifference between the two has significant (P <0.01).ConclusionFirst, the inferior vena cava filter placement and catheter thrombolysistechnology combined effective in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis formation,and reduce related complications; Second, the invention and use of inferior vena cavafilterIn order to prevent pulmonary embolism occurred provides an effective means.