Objective: The authors aimed to investigate the benefits and risks of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) in acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Background: The role of CDT in the management of DVT is evolving. Data on CDT versus anticoagulation alone in acute DVT is sparse. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that compared CDT to anticoagulation alone in patients with acute DVT. Results: We included 11 studies (four randomized control trials [RCTs] and seven observational studies) with a total of 8,737 patients. During hospital stay, patients who received CDT had higher odds of major bleeding (2.5% vs. 1.6%; OR 1.46, 95% CI [1.07, 1.98], p =.02), blood transfusion (10.8% vs. 6.2%; OR 1.8, 95% CI [1.52, 2.13], p <.001), and thromboembolism (15.5% vs. 10%; OR 1.67, 95% CI [1.47, 1.91], p <.001) compared with anticoagulation alone. At 6-month follow-up, patients who received CDT had higher venous patency (71.1% vs. 37.7%; OR 5.49, 95% CI [2.63, 11.5], p <.001) and lower postthrombotic syndrome (PTS; 27% vs. 40.7%; OR 0.44, 95% CI [0.22, 0.86], p =.02). During a mean follow-up duration of 30.5 ± 28 months, CDT group continued to have higher venous patency (79.6% vs. 71.8%; OR 3.79, 95% CI [1.54, 9.32], p =.004) and lower PTS (44.7% vs. 50.5%; OR 0.43, 95% CI [0.23, 0.78], p =.006), but no difference in thromboembolism. Conclusion: Compared with anticoagulation alone, CDT for patients with acute DVT was associated with a higher risk of complications, but a higher rate of venous patency and lower risk of postthrombotic syndrome at 2.5 years follow-up. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC
