急性髂股静脉血栓合并髂静脉压迫诊疗进展
Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute DVT with Iliac Vein Compression
DOI: 10.12677/acm.2026.163990, PDF, HTML, XML,   
作者: 付利锋:赣南医科大学第一临床医学院,江西 赣州;赣南医科大学第一附属医院普外三科血管外科,江西 赣州;陈居正, 胡 翔, 方萃福*:赣南医科大学第一附属医院普外三科血管外科,江西 赣州
关键词: 下肢深静脉血栓髂静脉压迫综合征腔内治疗髂静脉支架并发症Deep Vein Thrombosis of the Lower Limbs Iliac Vein Compression Syndrome Endovascular Therapy Iliac Vein Stent Complications
摘要: 累及下肢近端深静脉的髂股静脉血栓(Iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, IFDVT)合并盆腔静脉受压的髂静脉压迫综合征(iliac vein compression syndrome, IVCS)是引发肺栓塞(pulmonary embolism, PE)及长期影响下肢功能的血栓后综合征(post-thrombosis syndrome, PTS)的风险相对较高的临床疾病。本综述详细梳理其诊疗相关的前沿内容:影像诊断决策:用于下肢血管筛查的加压超声(compression ultrasonography, CUS)初筛操作时需重点关注血管反流、管壁增厚等间接征象;用于静脉解剖成像的计算机断层扫描/磁共振静脉成像(computed tomography venography/magnetic resonance venography, CTV/MRV)可清晰呈现病变部位的血管走行、管腔形态等解剖细节;用于血管腔内精准评估的血管内超声(intravascular ultrasound, IVUS)及具备精准血管成像能力的数字减影血管造影(digital subtraction angiography, DSA)被临床视作诊断的金标准,可精确测量量化血管狭窄程度、区分新鲜与陈旧血栓的性质。治疗方案更新及决策:在开展规范抗凝治疗的前提下,血栓脱落风险相对较高的患者置入下腔静脉滤器(inferior vena cava filter, IVCF)预防肺栓塞发作;血栓清除操作更常选用机械技术—经皮机械血栓清除(percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy, PMT)较传统的导管接触性溶栓(catheter-directed thrombolysis, CDT)明显降低出血风险,而操作相对简便的经皮血栓抽吸术(manual aspiration thrombectomy, MAT)与结合药物及器械的药械联合(pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis, PCDT)临床效果相近且治疗成本不算太高;对髂静脉存在重度狭窄的患者开展球囊血管成形术(percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, PTA)联合髂静脉支架植入,可明显降低PTS发生风险。长期管理:开展规范的抗凝治疗及定期开展影像学随访检查可降低血栓复发概率。后续可改进髂静脉专用支架的设计、验证下腔静脉滤器的长期使用安全性,并通过实时动态血流成像技术增强个体化治疗的精准度。采用“精准诊断–机械清栓–支架成形–规范抗凝”的一站式综合介入干预方案,可明显改善IFDVT患者的临床预后。
Abstract: Acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (IFDVT) complicated by iliac vein compression syndrome (IVCS) represents a high-risk condition predisposing patients to pulmonary embolism (PE) and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). This review comprehensively delineates advances in diagnosis and management: 1. Diagnostic Strategies: Initial screening with compression ultrasonography (CUS) necessitates scrutiny of indirect signs of obstruction. Computed tomography venography/magnetic resonance venography (CTV/MRV) delivers detailed anatomical visualization, while intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and digital subtraction angiography (DSA), as diagnostic gold standards, enable precise quantification of stenosis severity and characterization of thrombus composition. 2. Therapeutic Advances: Beyond foundational anticoagulation, prophylactic inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) implantation is indicated for high-risk PE prevention. Mechanical thrombectomy techniques are prioritized for clot clearance—percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (PMT) substantially reduces bleeding risk compared to catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). Manual aspiration thrombectomy (MAT) achieves comparable efficacy to pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) at lower cost. For severe iliac vein stenosis, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with adjunctive stent placement significantly mitigates PTS risk. 3. Long-Term Management: Standardized anticoagulation protocols and scheduled imaging surveillance reduce recurrence rates. Future priorities include optimizing dedicated iliac vein stent designs, validating long-term IVCF safety, and refining personalized therapy through dynamic hemodynamic imaging technology. Integrating a comprehensive interventional strategy of precision diagnosis, mechanical thrombectomy, stent revascularization, and consolidated anticoagulation significantly improves IFDVT prognosis.
文章引用:付利锋, 陈居正, 胡翔, 方萃福. 急性髂股静脉血栓合并髂静脉压迫诊疗进展[J]. 临床医学进展, 2026, 16(3): 2018-2027. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2026.163990

1. 背景与临床重要性

在全球范围内,下肢深静脉血栓(deep vein thrombosis, DVT)作为心血管相关疾病死亡率的第三大病因,由其引发的各类临床与社会层面的病症负担截至目前依旧在以稳定的幅度逐步攀升[1]。在所有确诊且病灶波及血管近端部位的DVT病灶的已确诊临床病例样本中,粗略统计约有占所有相关病例总数30%的比例病灶直接波及或牵连到髂股静脉血管节段(Iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, IFDVT) [2]。就当前临床认知而言,尽管由后天环境或医疗行为引发的致病风险因素包括外科手术干预、恶性肿瘤确诊这类医疗相关情况,以及长期卧床制动这类非医疗性状态改变,相关致病机制已被临床研究充分验证,不过解剖性髂静脉压迫综合征可被认定为IFDVT这类特定类型的血栓病症的一个不可忽视的、具备直接触发作用的或是决定病症发展走向的核心性的病症发作的起始触发机制,这一机制的在临床诊疗实践中的实际价值,却在很长一段时期内未被医护人员与研究人员给予应有的关注[3]。研究数据显示近75%的IFDVT患者同时存在IVCS [4]-[6]。由于未从根源上消除血管压迫这一直接引发病症的物理性机械梗阻状态,仅依靠传统血栓清除手段开展的治疗操作所能达到的临床改善效果常常相对来说不算太大,患者的长期恢复状况也不理想,存在相对较高的可能性逐步恶化为重度血栓后综合征(post-thrombosis syndrome, PTS)。PTS这类慢性血管并发症 的典型临床表征涵盖难以通过常规手段缓解的水肿症状,以及伴随脂质硬化性皮炎的迁延不愈静脉溃疡,给患者的长期生存质量带来明显的负面影响[7] [8]。基于上述临床观察与研究结论,对于处于急性发作期的IFDVT病例开展符合临床规范的早期识别、诊断以及符合个体病情的合理干预措施,这一操作对于明显减少PTS的临床发生比例有着切实的必要性。

2. 发病机制

IVCS造成DVT的核心机制,遵循着“梗阻–淤滞–血栓”的三联级联反应过程[1]。这一反应的首要环节,是解剖层面的机械压迫:右髂总动脉对左髂总静脉(left common iliac vein, LCIV)的跨越性压迫导致血管横截面积减少[9]。当狭窄程度超过80%时,会持续出现血流动力学层面的紊乱,造成局部组织出现缺氧、炎症反应以及内皮损伤等问题切应力数值的减少,能够迅速引发体内的炎症级联反应,借助KLF2/NF-κB (Krüppel-like factor 2/nuclear factor-kappa B)信号通路的失衡状态诱导内皮细胞出现激活;血流速度的降低还会在局部形成淤滞区域,促使组织因子(tissue factor, TF)的释放总量出现增加,而抗凝蛋白(protein C/proteinS, C/S)活性降低,进而在局部创造高凝微环境[10],使得深静脉血栓风险上升。在临床诊疗场景中,这类情况通常会表现为急性血栓形成以及腔道阻塞的症状[11],当下已有相关研究数据显示,CIV受压程度的加重与血栓负荷的增大呈明确的正相关性,存在明显CIV压迫情况的患者,其髂股深静脉血栓的发生概率几乎是无压迫患者的三倍[2]

3. 诊断技术的精准化进展

由于IVCS的症状和体征缺乏特异性,故其诊断仍依赖于影像学检查。

3.1. 下肢静脉加压超声(Compression Ultrasonography, CUS)

CUS可快速辨识出血栓范围。髂股静脉受累时,会表现出管腔不可压缩性伴血流信号消失的特征,全程型血栓则需结合患者的临床表现做综合判断虽然超声对急性髂股深静脉血栓检测的准确率非常高,但由于髂静脉位于盆腔深处且上覆有肠道气体,且患者体型相对较大且超声技师的专业水平存在差异,20%~50%的检查无法有效评估髂静脉[12]。即便髂静脉未能直接显影,出现下述超声征象时仍需留意近端压迫或梗阻:期相性改变减弱或消失:呼吸波动、远端挤压及Valsalva动作时血流信号反应性降低狭窄段频谱形态异常:多普勒频谱波形失去正常三相性特征湍流后mosaic征:狭窄后血管内出现“混杂镶嵌”样多普勒声像(提示涡流);血流速度比值异常:狭窄后与前向峰值静脉流速比值 > 2.0可作为诊断[13]

3.2. 计算机断层扫描静脉成像(Computed Tomography Venography, CTV)

CTV诊断急性IFDVT的敏感度与特异度已获临床相对较高认可。CTV技术可按造影剂的递送路径,分为经足背静脉注射的直接法、经前臂肘静脉注射的间接法这两种,还有二者协同的混合法。通过对采集到的影像学数据开展多平面重建(multi-planar reconstruction, MPR)、最大密度投影(multi-planar reconstruction, MPR)及容积再现(volume rendering, VR)处理,可直观获取盆腔静脉的解剖结构,包括横断面与三维成像等多种形式,相对较好地定位髂静脉狭窄与外部压迫区域[14]。但CTV的临床应用存在一些局限:静态成像特征无法捕捉静脉血流的动态变化,如流速梯度、期相性波动等;呼吸运动、心脏搏动及循环容量波动可造成影像失真;电离辐射累积与碘造影剂还会引发双重风险,即急性过敏反应及对比剂肾病。

3.3. 磁共振静脉成像(Magnetic Resonance Venography, MRV)

MRV在诊断急性DVT和确定血栓新鲜程度的临床应用场景中有相对较高的实用价值,能够清晰区分急性静脉血栓与超声检测到的既有陈旧或正在演变的深静脉血栓[15]。尽管MRV在临床实践中检查时间过长常被提及为核心局限,但根据非增强技术调整后的方案已证实可起到缩短扫描耗时的作用[16];以及优化扫描参数和提升图像质量,可以改良飞行时间磁共振静脉造影(mTOF-MRV)在髂静脉压迫综合征诊断中的诊断效果[17]

3.4. 数字减影血管造影(Digital Subtraction Angiography, DSA)

DSA这项技术是当前用于确诊IVCS的最可靠标准。该技术可全景展现髂静脉系统的完整解剖结构,还能开展多维度的动态评估——涵盖狭窄位置的确定与严重程度的划分,像血流动力学改变这类血流相关指标,以及侧支循环的开放状态与反流情况,也都会被纳入评估范畴,能给介入治疗的决策制定带来即时的参考信息;不过它带有侵入性的特点,一般不被建议用作这类疾病初筛的常规项目[18]

3.5. 血管内超声(Intravascular Ultrasound, IVUS)

IVUS通常与静脉造影同步开展,两种成像技术的协同运用可进一步增强IVCS诊断的精准程度,在部分医疗体系成熟的欧美国家中被视作诊断领域的“金标准”,诊断的精准度比单纯静脉造影更高[19] [20]。IVUS在临床诊断中的核心价值彰显于多个具体维度:(1) 狭窄程度定量评估:实时捕捉并测量最小管腔面积,同侧内髂静脉的血流逆转、横侧盆侧副静脉及上行腰静脉的异常肿大也可清晰观察到,明显比传统影像学方法更具优势。(2) 血栓类型鉴别诊断:陈旧性纤维隔膜会呈现出高回声信号且伴随钙化粘连表现,急性血栓则会表现为均质低回声信号及特征性漂浮尾征。(3) 介入治疗导航指引:精准锁定病变区域的解剖位置用以选定适配性强的植入支架[21] [22]。IVUS这项成像技术的整体成本相对较高,同时属于带有侵入性的临床操作,因此一般不会用作髂股静脉阻塞病症的初步的筛查与检测手段。

4. 治疗

IFDVT患者可能出现的各类早期并发症当中,栓子脱落引发的致死性PE是最危险的类型,因此需尽早着手开展抗凝治疗[18]。仅依靠单一的抗凝治疗手段,无法快速且彻底地清除体内形成的血栓,还会使得静脉再通的速度变慢、恢复程度受限,但这类治疗手段还有可能加重患处静脉瓣膜的损伤程度,使得增加血栓后综合征的发生风险,这类情况在髂股静脉血栓患者的预后过程中尤为明显[23]

所以在具体的临床诊疗工作开展过程当中要为每一位患者仔细考量多种差异化的血栓清除具体方案,主动尽可能做到彻底地切除患者体内的急性深静脉血栓组织,能够留存静脉的正常生理功能,同时防范PTS的发生[24]。在患者接受血栓清除操作的后续阶段,还需解除静脉部位的机械梗阻问题,进一步降低PTS的发病风险[25]。在临床诊疗场景中,急性IFDVT的快速血栓清除工作主要依托外科手术与血管介入两类手段。介入治疗因拥有创伤相对较小、血管再通比例相对较高的特点,目前已成为临床优先选用的方案[26]。介入治疗主要包括导管接触性溶栓(catheter directed thrombolysis, CDT)、经皮机械血栓切除术(percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy, PMT)、药物机械导管定向溶栓(pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis, PCDT)、手动抽吸血栓切除术(manual aspiration thrombectomy, MAT)、经皮腔内血管成形(percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, PTA)和支架置入及下腔静脉滤器置入(inferior vena cava filter, IVCF)。选定血管内血栓清除技术时,要对其清除效率、安全性能与再闭塞比例开展评估,同时结合患者的血栓分期与分型情况制定适配个体的治疗方案,这对诊疗的实际疗效有着相当关键的地位。

4.1. 导管接触性溶栓

CDT是一种专门用于血栓溶解的微创技术,操作过程中会把溶栓导管直接置入血栓内部或者紧邻血栓的部位,局部灌注溶栓药物,做到用高浓度的药物精准溶解血栓。和仅实施单纯抗凝治疗的方案相比,CDT借助定向给药的导管通路,仔细清除深静脉系统内的血栓负荷,当下已有数量众多的临床及基础实验,例如CaVenT证实早期清除血栓明显能够使得PTS的发病概率及相关风险出现下降[27] [28]。但在ATTRACT研究中,急性近端深静脉血栓患者接受CDT治疗并未降低血栓后综合征风险,但增加了大出血风险[29]。ATTRACT研究结果对广泛推荐对近端DVT进行介入血栓清除提出了重要挑战。尽管在全部入组患者中未看到PTS的总体减少,但其深入的亚组分析强烈提示,早期血栓清除的主要长期获益可能集中体现在髂股静脉血栓(IFDVT)患者身上,表现为PTS严重程度和生活质量的显著改善,而非PTS发生率的绝对降低。然而,这种获益伴随出血风险的上升,需仔细权衡。其他类型的近端血栓(如单纯股腘静脉血栓)患者是否能从介入清除中获益存在不确定性。开展时长较长的溶栓治疗操作时,需要医护人员频繁对患者的各项凝血功能指标开展监测,一旦出现出血情况常需中断治疗操作或者开展输血干预[30],医护人员的诊疗工作负荷会出现明显的加重[31],所以在开展导管介导的溶栓治疗操作时所选用的溶栓药物以及对应的溶栓药物剂量,都需严格依照临床诊疗指南要求执行[32] [33]。CDT的临床禁忌情况包括:3个月内有脑出血病史或接受过重大手术,或是1个月内有内脏出血病史或接受过手术;存在活动性重症感染;体内有漂浮性髂股静脉血栓且未预先置入下腔静脉滤器;患有难控性高血压,收缩压超过180 mmHg或是舒张压超过100 mmHg;对于孕妇以及年龄 ≥ 75岁的高龄患者,需谨慎开展治疗前的评估工作[34]

4.2. 经皮机械血栓切除术

MT是经皮穿刺将专用血栓清除装置导入目标病变血管内部,通过旋转抽吸、流变溶解或超声碎裂等多种物理机制直接清除血管内血栓,同时避免全身系统性溶栓药物大规模应用的一类微创介入治疗技术。当下国内临床场景中可用的血栓清除器主要有AngioJet血栓清除器和Straub Aspirex血栓清除器。AngioJet血栓清除系统采用高压流体喷射溶栓剂碎裂血栓组织并同步实施抽吸操作,增强溶栓药物与血栓组织的接触效率,适用治疗范围包括髂/股/腘静脉部位的急性期血栓病变[34];而Aspire血栓切除装置依靠高速旋转的螺旋刀头机械旋切与持续负压抽吸的耦合作用清除血管内血栓组织,适用治疗范围涵盖髂股静脉部位的急性及亚急性期血栓病变。临床场景中使用Aspirex旋转血栓切除装置开展髂股静脉血栓切除术后,对应的PMT治疗方案短期通畅性表现极佳,明显降低中重度PTS的发生概率,同时器械相关并发症发生率处于较低水平,其中包含出血症状[35] [36]。不同研究团队完成的多项临床观察数据显示,PTM是针对急性髂股深静脉血栓的一种安全且对病情控制起到作用的治疗方法,可逐步恢复病变部位静脉通畅性,降低DVT复发及PTS的发生风险。就治疗效果的对比而言,与单纯采用CDT的治疗方案相比,PMT术后患者出现PTS症状和出血类并发症的发生风险更低[37] [38]

4.3. 药物–机械联合清除术

PCDT是CDT与PMT两种术式结合形成的治疗方案,借助多种不同类型的导管器械输注溶栓药物,并开展机械性血栓粉碎操作。相关临床研究的数据显示,和单纯采用CDT的治疗方式相比,PCDT有相近或者相对更优的血栓清除作用,同时还能降低后续溶栓的药物强度,在缩短整体治疗时长的同时,减小出血相关的潜在风险[38] [39]。对于急性髂股静脉血栓形成的患者群体,PCDT并未做到降低血栓后综合征PTS或复发性静脉血栓栓塞的出现概率,但能明显改善发病初期的下肢不适症状,并且在长达24个月的随访观察期间,既能减轻PTS的严重程度,缩小中重度PTS患者的占比,也能让患者的生活质量得到更为明显的提升[40]

4.4. 经皮血栓抽吸术

MAT通过在病变血管部位置入大腔导管鞘开展高流量负压抽吸操作,直接清除血管腔内形成的血栓,达成安全、顺畅的血管再通效果。在大量临床案例中应用后,该技术明显降低围术期的并发症发生概率、患者死亡概率以及血栓再次形成的风险[38]。多项近期完成的临床研究数据显示,对于发作突然、症状表现明显的急性IFDVT,用于治疗该病症的MAT与PCDT两种介入治疗方式的临床治疗效果大致相当,两者都能帮助患者达成较为理想的临床恢复状态;但MAT治疗方案可以使得平均每例患者的整体治疗成本出现明显下降[41]。从临床实际应用的情况来看,MAT存在的不足主要体现为:反复开展导管操作可能诱发血管内皮组织损伤,同时造成围术期的出血情况;在血栓抽吸的具体操作过程中,还可能误吸患者体内的循环血液,引发溶血反应,进而造成患者血红蛋白水平下降,这种情况对于本身存在贫血症状的患者尤需重点予以关注和从多个方面开展的医学评估。

4.5. 经皮腔内血管成形及支架置入

球囊血管成形术联合血管支架植入操作便成为CDT或PMT术后遗留的残余静脉狭窄、髂股静脉重度狭窄或闭塞等类型的非急性血栓性病变的一类临床公认的标准临床治疗策略。就慢性重度狭窄或是完全闭塞的静脉病变而言,单纯开展球囊成形术后,往往会因血管内膜的病理性增生引发管腔出现弹性回缩现象,使得患者的远期康复预后状况不算太好。与之不同的是血管支架植入操作能对病变管壁起到支撑作用,逐步恢复血管原本的生理性血流动力学状态,进而让远期血管通畅性有所提升,同时降低血栓复发概率与PTS的发生风险[42]。相关临床研究数据显示,在彻底清除静脉血栓后开展髂静脉支架植入操作,会表现出相对不错的初级通畅率,且伴随的并发症不多,便成为发病处于急性期的IFDVT患者兼具安全性与实际作用的临床治疗选择[43] [44]。血管支架植入操作中的精确定位环节,会对最终的临床治疗效果产生关键影响,若支架未对狭窄管腔实施充分覆盖,便可能造成支架出现纵向位移或是压缩变形的情况,进而诱发继发性管腔再狭窄问题。在腹股沟韧带以远的区域植入支架,虽不会对短期的血管通畅性造成影响,但会明显提升PTS的发生风险。对于髂–下腔静脉交界位置的病变,临床诊疗中提议将支架近端放置入下腔静脉内部且深度不超过1 cm,支架远端则要避免跨越腹股沟韧带,以此做到对病变区域的完全覆盖[45]-[48]。目前对于因保守治疗失败导致髂股静脉狭窄导致生活质量受损症状而接受支架置管的患者,Abre、Venovo和Wallstent-Z支架组合似乎在临床和生活质量方面均有相似改善效果,三种支架类型间的支架耐久度也未发现显著差异[49] [50]。髂静脉支架植入术中期通畅率与安全性良好,但长期随访中仍可见支架内再狭窄、闭塞、支架受压变形、移位断裂及血栓后综合征等并发症[51]。有文献报道,髂静脉支架术后支架内再狭窄是导致症状复发与再干预的最主要原因[52] [53],其危险因素主要包括血栓后病变、支架定位不佳、病变覆盖不全及术后抗凝不规范。支架机械性并发症以受压最为常见,支架断裂与移位发生率相对较低,多与长期机械应力、解剖压迫及支架疲劳相关,虽多数无明显症状,但可升高再狭窄与血栓风险[54]。此外,部分患者术后仍存在不同程度血栓后综合征,与术前血栓病程、病变性质及术后管理密切相关。规范的术后抗凝、定期影像学随访及精准的手术操作,是降低长期并发症、改善远期预后的关键。临床应重视危险因素分层,优化手术策略与围术期管理,以进一步提升髂静脉支架治疗的长期有效性与安全性[55]

4.6. 下腔静脉滤器置入

这类滤器植入操作的核心临床指征,是预防可能引发生命危险的致死性肺栓塞,或是阻止已存在的肺栓塞病灶处的血栓出现进一步蔓延的情况。当前国际指南明确建议对以下DVT患者置入滤器[47]:(1) 已发生急性PE者;(2) 存在抗凝禁忌证;(3) 规范抗凝中仍复发PE者。然而,下腔静脉滤器疗效与安全性方面,基于前瞻性研究获取的循证医学证据依然不算充足,在全回收型与生物可降解型滤器不断更新换代的过程中,若能通过大样本量的随机对照试验对其风险效益比做仔细验证,此后的介入治疗操作中,常规植入此类滤器的方案或许会成为被广泛遵循的标准策略。

5. 小结和展望

急性髂股静脉血栓形成,也就是IFDVT,会使得肺栓塞与血栓后综合征的发病概率相对较高,这样的状况会明显威胁患者的生命安全与日常生存质量,更早开展精准诊断与个性化干预措施是十分必要的。在对IFDVT开展诊断工作的过程中,需要结合重点关注血流动力学间接征象的加压超声、CTV与MRV三维成像手段,以及被业内视为诊断金标准的IVUS或DSA技术,仔细评估髂静脉的压迫程度、血栓的具体性质与波及范围等多项关键指标。对于IFDVT的治疗工作,需遵循时效性、安全性、综合性和长期性的相关准则。对于肺栓塞发病风险相对较高的IFDVT患者,可实施下腔静脉滤器,也就是IVCF的置入操作。在血栓清除的操作环节,临床医护人员可根据患者的病程进展快慢、血栓负荷大小等实际状况,选择导管接触性溶栓、机械血栓清除、药械联合溶栓或抽吸取栓等不同干预方案,这些方案能明显增加血管再通率,同时缩短患者的整体治疗周期。对于合并髂静脉压迫状况,比如患有May-Thurner综合征的IFDVT患者,实施髂静脉支架植入术能起到恢复正常血流的作用,进而降低血栓后综合征的发病风险。在患者完成急性期治疗后的长期健康管理阶段,需为其实施规范的抗凝治疗方案,并开展规律的影像学与临床指标随访工作,以此减少疾病复发的可能性。以微创性、高效性与安全性为核心特点的介入治疗方式,如今已成为临床处理IFDVT时最常采用的核心治疗方案。在后续的临床实践与医学研究进程中,伴随着腔内诊疗技术的不断革新,比如动态血流影像设备的推广应用、髂静脉专用支架的研发与改进,以及循证医学体系的持续完善,IFDVT的综合诊疗水准将得到进一步上升,从而逐步改善患者的长期健康状况与生存质量。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Stone, J., Hangge, P., Albadawi, H., Wallace, A., Shamoun, F., Knuttien, M.G., et al. (2017) Deep Vein Thrombosis: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Medical Management. Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy, 7, S276-S284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] Shi, Y., Yuan, Y., Gong, M., Su, H., Chen, L., Huang, H., et al. (2022) The Association between Iliac Vein Compression Degree and Characteristics of First Diagnosed Left Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, 9, Article 1073586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Harbin, M.M. and Lutsey, P.L. (2020) May‐Thurner Syndrome: History of Understanding and Need for Defining Population Prevalence. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 18, 534-542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Zhu, Q., Yang, L., Zhu, H., Kong, W., Feng, R., Luo, J., et al. (2022) Prevalence of Left Iliac Vein Compression in an Asymptomatic Population and Patients with Left Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study in Southern China. Phlebology: The Journal of Venous Disease, 37, 602-609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Næss, I.A., Christiansen, S.C., Romundstad, P., Cannegieter, S.C., Rosendaal, F.R. and Hammerstrøm, J. (2007) Incidence and Mortality of Venous Thrombosis: A Population‐Based Study. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 5, 692-699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Wang, H., Jia, W., Xi, Y., Li, Y., Fan, Y., Deng, X., et al. (2022) Morphometric and Hemodynamic Analysis of the Compressed Iliac Vein. Journal of Endovascular Therapy, 31, 744-755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Rodrigues, L.D.S., Bertanha, M., El Dib, R. and Moura, R. (2021) Association between Deep Vein Thrombosis and Stent Patency in Symptomatic Iliac Vein Compression Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 9, 275-284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] 杨海南, 李旭丰, 练辉, 等. 介入治疗髂静脉压迫综合征伴下肢深静脉血栓形成的临床应用研究[J]. 罕少疾病杂志, 2024, 31(12): 112-113.
[9] Poyyamoli, S., Mehta, P., Cherian, M., Anand, R.R., Patil, S.B., Kalva, S., et al. (2021) May-Thurner Syndrome. Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy, 11, 1104-1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Chiu, J. and Chien, S. (2011) Effects of Disturbed Flow on Vascular Endothelium: Pathophysiological Basis and Clinical Perspectives. Physiological Reviews, 91, 327-387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Rivera, K. and Ahn, S.S. (2025) Biofluid Mechanics and Pathology of Venous Compression Syndromes: A Scoping Review. Cureus, 17, e84402.
[12] Zucker, E.J., Ganguli, S., Ghoshhajra, B.B., Gupta, R. and Prabhakar, A.M. (2016) Imaging of Venous Compression Syndromes. Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy, 6, 519-532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Mousa, A.Y. and AbuRahma, A.F. (2013) May-Thurner Syndrome: Update and Review. Annals of Vascular Surgery, 27, 984-995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Saleem, T. and Raju, S. (2021) Comparison of Intravascular Ultrasound and Multidimensional Contrast Imaging Modalities for Characterization of Chronic Occlusive Iliofemoral Venous Disease: A Systematic Review. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 9, 1545-1556.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Mendichovszky, I.A., Priest, A.N., Bowden, D.J., Hunter, S., Joubert, I., Hilborne, S., et al. (2016) Combined MR Direct Thrombus Imaging and Non-Contrast Magnetic Resonance Venography Reveal the Evolution of Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Feasibility Study. European Radiology, 27, 2326-2332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] 张伟, 刘洪, 赵渝. 髂静脉压迫综合征的诊断与治疗[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2023, 43(12): 1429-1431, 1435.
[17] Peng, G., Zhu, W., Zuo, Z., Liu, C., Zhang, Z., Zhao, Y., et al. (2023) Efficacy of Modified Time of Flight Magnetic Resonance Venography in Diagnosis of Iliac Vein Compression Syndrome. European Journal of Radiology, 166, Article ID: 111020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Radaideh, Q., Patel, N. and Shammas, N.W. (2019) Iliac Vein Compression: Epidemiology, Diagnosis and Treatment. Vascular Health and Risk Management, 15, 115-122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Mangla, A. and Hamad, H. (2026) May-Thurner Syndrome. StatPearls.
[20] Montminy, M.L., Thomasson, J.D., Tanaka, G.J., Lamanilao, L.M., Crim, W. and Raju, S. (2019) A Comparison between Intravascular Ultrasound and Venography in Identifying Key Parameters Essential for Iliac Vein Stenting. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 7, 801-807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] 曾国军, 曾奕灵, 吴越, 等. 《欧洲血管外科学会2022年慢性下肢静脉病管理临床实践指南》解读: 髂静脉疾病[J]. 中国胸心血管外科临床杂志, 2022, 29(12): 1562-1566.
[22] Lau, I., Png, C.Y.M., Eswarappa, M., Miller, M., Kumar, S., Tadros, R., et al. (2019) Defining the Utility of Anteroposterior Venography in the Diagnosis of Venous Iliofemoral Obstruction. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 7, 514-521.e4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Kim, K.A., Choi, S.Y. and Kim, R. (2021) Endovascular Treatment for Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: An Overview. Korean Journal of Radiology, 22, 931-943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[24] Watson, L., Broderick, C. and Armon, M.P. (2016) Thrombolysis for Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, No. 11, CD002783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] 王鹏辉, 董智慧. 下肢深静脉血栓后综合征的腔内治疗[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2023, 43(12): 1355-1358.
[26] Casey, E.T., Murad, M.H., Zumaeta-Garcia, M., Elamin, M.B., Shi, Q., Erwin, P.J., et al. (2012) Treatment of Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 55, 1463-1473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[27] Enden, T., Haig, Y., Kløw, N., Slagsvold, C., Sandvik, L., Ghanima, W., et al. (2012) Long-Term Outcome after Additional Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis versus Standard Treatment for Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis (the Cavent Study): A Randomised Controlled Trial. The Lancet, 379, 31-38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] Shi, B., Huang, L., Wei, S., Zhu, J., Li, Z., Ren, J., et al. (2025) Hemodynamic Characteristics and Clinical Treatment of Patients with Iliac Vein Compression Syndrome. Frontiers in Surgery, 12, Article 1542894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[29] Vedantham, S., Goldhaber, S.Z., Julian, J.A., Kahn, S.R., Jaff, M.R., Cohen, D.J., et al. (2017) Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Deep-Vein Thrombosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 377, 2240-2252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[30] Broderick, C., Watson, L. and Armon, M.P. (2021) Thrombolytic Strategies versus Standard Anticoagulation for Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis of the Lower Limb. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, No. 1, CD002783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[31] Chen, J.X., Sudheendra, D., Stavropoulos, S.W. and Nadolski, G.J. (2026) Role of Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in Management of Iliofemoral Deep Venous Thrombosis. Radiographics, 36, 1565-1575.
[32] Stevens, S.M., Woller, S.C., Baumann Kreuziger, L., Doerschug, K., Geersing, G., Klok, F.A., et al. (2024) Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease. CHEST, 166, 388-404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[33] 顾建平, 徐克, 滕皋军. 下肢深静脉血栓形成介入治疗规范的专家共识(第2版) [J]. 介入放射学杂志, 2019, 28(1): 1-10.
[34] Pouncey, A.L., Gwozdz, A.M., Johnson, O.W., Silickas, J., Saha, P., Thulasidasan, N., et al. (2020) Angiojet Pharmacomechanical Thrombectomy and Catheter Directed Thrombolysis vs. Catheter Directed Thrombolysis Alone for the Treatment of Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Single Centre Retrospective Cohort Study. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 60, 578-585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[35] Minko, P., Bücker, A., Laschke, M., Menger, M., Bohle, R. and Katoh, M. (2013) Mechanical Thrombectomy of Iliac Vein Thrombosis in a Pig Model Using the Rotarex and Aspirex Catheters. CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, 37, 211-217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[36] Lichtenberg, M., Stahlhoff, W.F., Özkapi, A., de Graaf, R. and Breuckmann, F. (2019) Safety, Procedural Success and Outcome of the Aspirex®s Endovascular Thrombectomy System in the Treatment of Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis—Data from the Arnsberg Aspirex Registry. Vasa, 48, 341-346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[37] Wong, P., Chan, Y., Law, Y. and Cheng, S.W. (2019) Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy in the Treatment of Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Systematic Review. Hong Kong Medical Journal, 25, 48-57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[38] Lopez, R., DeMartino, R., Fleming, M., Bjarnason, H. and Neisen, M. (2019) Aspiration Thrombectomy for Acute Iliofemoral or Central Deep Venous Thrombosis. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 7, 162-168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[39] Ni, Q., Long, J., Guo, X., Yang, S., Meng, X., Zhang, L., et al. (2021) Clinical Efficacy of One-Stage Thrombus Removal via Contralateral Femoral and Ipsilateral Tibial Venous Access for Pharmacomechanical Thrombectomy in Entire-Limb Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 9, 1128-1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[40] Comerota, A.J., Kearon, C., Gu, C., Julian, J.A., Goldhaber, S.Z., Kahn, S.R., et al. (2019) Endovascular Thrombus Removal for Acute Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis. Circulation, 139, 1162-1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[41] Li, X., Xie, H., Zhang, Y. and Li, H. (2020) Individual Choice for the Aspiration Thrombectomy Treatment of Acute Iliofemoral Deep Venous Thrombosis. Annals of Vascular Surgery, 69, 237-245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[42] Tritschler, T., Kraaijpoel, N., Le Gal, G. and Wells, P.S. (2018) Venous Thromboembolism. JAMA, 320, 1583-1594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[43] Park, J.Y., Ahn, J.H., Jeon, Y.S., Cho, S.G., Kim, J.Y. and Hong, K.C. (2013) Iliac Vein Stenting as a Durable Option for Residual Stenosis after Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis and Angioplasty of Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis Secondary to May-Thurner Syndrome. Phlebology: The Journal of Venous Disease, 29, 461-470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[44] Jiang, C., Zhao, Y., Wang, X., Liu, H., Tan, T. and Li, F. (2020) Midterm Outcome of Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis Combined with Stenting for Treatment of Iliac Vein Compression Syndrome with Acute Iliofemoral Deep Venous Thrombosis. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 8, 24-30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[45] Khairy, S.A., Neves, R.J., Hartung, O. and O’Sullivan, G.J. (2017) Factors Associated with Contralateral Deep Venous Thrombosis after Iliocaval Venous Stenting. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 54, 745-751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[46] Avgerinos, E.D., Saadeddin, Z., Abou Ali, A.N., Pandya, Y., Hager, E., Singh, M., et al. (2019) Outcomes and Predictors of Failure of Iliac Vein Stenting after Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Acute Iliofemoral Thrombosis. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 7, 153-161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[47] 李晓强, 张福先, 王深明. 深静脉血栓形成的诊断和治疗指南(第三版) [J]. 中国血管外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 9(4): 250-257.
[48] Badesha, A.S., Siddiqui, M.M., Bains, B.R.S., Bains, P.R.S. and Khan, T. (2022) A Systematic Review on the Incidence of Stent Migration in the Treatment of Acute and Chronic Iliofemoral Disease Using Dedicated Venous Stents. Annals of Vascular Surgery, 83, 328-348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[49] Powell, T., Raju, S. and Jayaraj, A. (2023) Comparison between a Dedicated Venous Stent and Standard Composite Wallstent-Z Stent Approach to Iliofemoral Venous Stenting: Intermediate-Term Outcomes. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 11, 82-90.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[50] Smith, S., Butts, H., Owens, J., Matheson, S., Dickerson, M.M. and Jayaraj, A. (2025) Outcomes Following Stenting for Symptomatic Chronic Iliofemoral Venous Stenosis—A Comparison of Three Stent Types. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 13, Article ID: 102208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[51] Joyce, D.P., Morris, R.I., Black, S.A., Desai, K.R. and O’Sullivan, G.J. (2024) Major Complications of Deep Venous Stenting. CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, 47, 1677-1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[52] Jayaraj, A., Fuller, R., Raju, S. and Stafford, J. (2022) In-Stent Restenosis and Stent Compression Following Stenting for Chronic Iliofemoral Venous Obstruction. Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders, 10, 42-51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[53] Razavi, M.K., Jaff, M.R. and Miller, L.E. (2015) Safety and Effectiveness of Stent Placement for Iliofemoral Venous Outflow Obstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, 8, e002772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[54] Foegh, P., Strandberg, C., Joergensen, S., Myschetzky, P.S., Klitfod, L., Just, S., et al. (2022) Long-Term Integrity of 53 Iliac Vein Stents after Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis. Acta Radiologica, 64, 881-886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[55] De Maeseneer, M.G., Kakkos, S.K., Aherne, T., Baekgaard, N., Black, S., Blomgren, L., et al. (2022) Editor’s Choice—European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2022 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Chronic Venous Disease of the Lower Limbs. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 63, 184-267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]