3.8 Article

Effort thrombosis (Paget-Schroetter syndrome) in active young adults: Current concepts in diagnosis and treatment

期刊

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR NURSING
卷 24, 期 4, 页码 116-126

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvn.2006.09.003

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effort thrombosis or Paget-Schroetter syndrome most often affects young, active adults who are engaged in sports activities or whose professions require repetitive arm movements causing trauma to the axillary-subclavian vein and precipitating deep vein thrombosis. The presence of unilateral edema in the upper extremity is often thought to be attributable to trauma from an exercise regimen rather than acute deep vein thrombosis or compression of the subclavian vein by extrinsic anatomic structures. Because this syndrome occurs in young, active adults it has the potential for considerable long-term morbidity if it remains undetected or inadequately treated. Inadequate or inappropriate treatment may cause a loss of productivity over a lifetime and significantly affect the quality of life. Although more prevalent in male athletes, it is now increasingly affecting young women as they become more seriously involved in athletic endeavors. The purpose of this article is to increase the awareness of the prevalence, clinical significance, and importance of early detection of effort thrombosis of the axillary-subclavian vein, also known as Paget Schroetter syndrome, to educate health care providers regarding the limitations of some diagnostic tools, and to introduce new methods of treatment that offer better long-term results. The prevalence, differential diagnosis, diagnostic modalities, and medical and surgical interventions that have been successfully used to treat Paget-Schroetter syndrome are discussed, and evidence is provided to support the selections. The results of patients who were identified and treated within the last 2 years at the University of Southern California Center for Vascular Care are reviewed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据