Comparison Of Efficacy Of Common Heparin And Low Molecular Weight Heparin In The Treatment Of Deep Venous Thrombosis In Lower Extremities Under Catheter Thrombolysis In High Altitude Areas

Objective:In this study,by comparing the efficacy of common heparin and low molecular weight heparin in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities under catheter contact thrombolysis in high-altitude areas,the advantages and disadvantages of the two anticoagulant methods were discussed,providing accurate clinical evidence for the anticoagulant methods of combined catheter contact thrombolysis in the efficacy of acute deep venous thrombosis of lower extremity in high attitude areas.Mehtods:From January 2014 to September 2019,92 patients were diagnosed with acute deep venous thrombosis of lower limbs in the department of cardiothoracic vascular surgery,affiliated hospital of Qinghai university,including 47 patients in the common heparin(UFH)combined with catheter thrombolysis group and 45 patients in the low molecular weight heparin(LMWH)combined with catheter thrombolysis group.The preoperative general conditions of the two groups of patients were compared,including the peak value of the second aggregator during the treatment period,the peak rate,complications,the peri-crus diameter difference,vascular patency,pain relief and treatment efficiency at discharge,and the peri-crus diameter difference at 30 days after discharge.Results:1.General situation: Gender,age,lesion site,risk factor Autar scale score,course of disease,classification,time from onset to surgery,and catheter exposure to thrombolysis of the two groups showed no significant difference,P > 0.05.2.Curative effects2.1 Comparison of week-diameter difference: The week-diameter difference between the two groups at discharge and 30 d after discharge was compared with that before surgery,P < 0.05.The difference of peripheral diameter of the lower leg in theUFH group was greater than that in the LMWH group,P < 0.05.The difference of peripheral diameter between the two groups was compared 30 days after discharge,P > 0.05.2.2 Vascular patency:Preoperative blood vessel patency scores of the two groups were compared,P > 0.05.The score of vascular patency in the two groups at discharge was compared with that before surgery,P < 0.05.The blood vessel patency score and the blood vessel patency rate of the two groups were compared at discharge,and the UFH group was superior to the LMWH group,P < 0.05.2.3 The peak and peak velocity of the second polymer:The peak and peak velocity of the second polymer in UFH group were higher than that in LMWH group,P < 0.05.2.4 Pain relief:There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in preoperative pain grading distribution and pain relief at discharge at P > 0.05.2.5 Treatment response rate:The distribution of curative effect and total effective rate of the two groups at discharge were P > 0.05,the difference was not statistically significant.2.6 Complications: The difference of the incidence of total complications and hemorrhage-related complications between the two groups were not statistically significant,P > 0.05.Conclusions:(1)Both anticoagulant methods are effective methods for the treatment of deep venous thrombosis in lower extremities in conjunction with catheter contact thrombolysis.(2)The short-term effect of common heparin group on lower limb edema and vein patency was better.(3)There was no significant difference between the normal heparin group and the low molecular weight heparin group at 30 days after discharge.