Long-term follow-up of the stenting across the iliocaval confluence in patients with iliac venous lesions
Stent implantation is the common treatment method for iliac vein (IV) occlusion. IV stents usually enter into the inferior vena cava (IVC) to partially or completely cover the contralateral IV, but it is still uncertain whether this can increase the risk of thrombosis in the contralateral IV. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the stent position on the bilateral IVs patency. A total of 261 patients with symptomatic IV lesions, including 177 patients with non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions (NIVLs) and 84 patients with thrombotic iliac vein lesions (TIVLs), were implanted with IV stents between July 2007 and June 2017. The data of these patients were retrospectively studied. The follow-up time was 6–114 months, and the median time was 62 months. A total of 183 cases had stenting into the IVC for more than 5 mm. The incidence of thrombosis in the contralateral IV was only 0.55% (1/183). A total of 17 short- and long-term cumulative cases had ipsilateral thrombosis on the stent side. There was no significant difference between the incidence of patients (8.79%, 7/78) with stenting into the IVC for less than 5 mm and those with more than 5 mm (5.46%, 10/183, P = 0.287). However, in the TIVLs group, the incidence of ipsilateral thrombosis between stenting positions less than 5 mm (29.6%, 8/27) and those more than 5 mm (8.77%, 5/57) was significantly different (P = 0.022). Stent implantation for NIVLs had an excellent long-term patency rate; the primary patency rate and the assisted primary patency rate were 97.7% and 100%, respectively. The entry of IV stents into the IVC was safe and had a very low incidence of thrombosis in the contralateral vein. Stenting less into the IVC increased the incidence of thrombosis in the ipsilateral vein, especially among thrombotic cases. Treatment of NIVLs using stent implantation had a better long-term patency rate. This principle plays an important guiding role in the endovascular therapy of IV lesions.
KeywordsIliac vein stenting Contralateral vein Endovascular therapy Thrombosis
This work was supported by Science and Technology Program of Yangzhou, China (YZ2016063).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Neglén P, Raju S (2000) Balloon dilation and stenting of chronic iliac vein lesions: technical aspects and early clinical outcome. J Endovasc Ther 7(2):79–91Google Scholar
- 2.Hartung O (2011) Results of stenting for post-thrombotic venous obstructive lesions. Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther 23(4):255–260Google Scholar
- 3.Hager ES, Yuo T, Tahara R et al (2013) Outcomes of endovascular intervention for May-Thurner syndrome. J Vasc Surg 1(3):271–275Google Scholar
- 4.Erin H, Murphy MD, Johns B et al (2017) Deep venous thrombosis associated with caval extensionof iliac stents. J Vasc Surg 5(1):8–17Google Scholar
- 5.Khairy SA, Neves RJ, Hartung O et al (2018) Factors associated with contralateral deep venous thrombosis after iliocaval venous stenting. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 67(1):358–359Google Scholar
- 6.Neglén P, Hollis KC, Olivier J, Raju S (2007) Stenting of the venous outflow in chronic venous disease: long-term stent related outcome, clinical, and hemodynamic result. J Vasc Surg 46:979–990Google Scholar
- 7.Hartung O, Lugli M, Nicolini P et al (2010) Stenting for iliac veins post-thrombotic obstructive lesions: results of a multicentric retrospective study. J Vasc Surg 51(3):790Google Scholar
- 8.Dabir D, Feisst A, Thomas D (2018) Physical properties of venous stents: an experimental comparison. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 41(6):942–950Google Scholar
- 9.Sang H, Li X, Qian A et al (2014) Outcome of endovascular treatment in post-thrombotic syndrome. Ann Vasc Surg 28(6):1493–1500Google Scholar
- 10.Gloviczki P, Lawrence PF (2017) Iliac vein stenting and contralateral deep vein thrombosis. J Vasc Surg 5(1):5–6Google Scholar
- 11.Mahnken AH, Thomson K, Haan MD et al (2014) CIRSE standards of practice guidelines on iliocaval stenting. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 37(4):889–897Google Scholar
- 12.Murphy EH, Johns B, Varney E et al (2017) Deep venous thrombosis associated with caval extension of iliac stents. J Vasc Surg 5(1):8–17Google Scholar
- 13.Ye K, Lu X, Li W et al (2012) Long-term outcomes of stent placement for symptomatic nonthrombotic iliac vein compression lesions in chronic venous disease. Vasc Interv Radiol 23(4):497–502Google Scholar
- 14.Knipp BS, Ferguson E, Williams DM et al (2007) Factors associated with outcome after interventional treatment of symptomatic iliac vein compression syndrome. J Vasc Surg 46(4):743–749Google Scholar
- 15.Raju S (2013) Best management options for chronic iliac vein stenosis and occlusion. J Vasc Surg 57(4):1163–1169Google Scholar