A Comparison of Advanced Therapy to Anticoagulation Alone for Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Association with Clinical Outcomes and Cost (original) (raw)
Related papers
Management appropriateness and outcomes of patients with acute pulmonary embolism
The European respiratory journal, 2018
The impact of adherence to published guidelines on the outcomes of patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) has not been well defined by previous studies.In this prospective cohort study of patients admitted to a respiratory department (n=2096), we evaluated whether patients with PE had better outcomes if they were acutely managed according to international guidelines. Outcomes consisted of all-cause mortality, PE-related mortality, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding events during the first month of follow-up after diagnosis.Overall, 408 patients (19% (95% CI 18-21%)) did not receive guideline-adherent PE management. Patients receiving non-adherent management were significantly more likely to experience all-cause mortality (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.39 (95% CI 1.57-3.61) or PE-related mortality (adjusted OR 5.02 (95% CI 2.42-10.42); p<0.001) during follow-up. Non-adherent management was also a significant independent predictor of recurrent VTE (OR 2.19 ...
Journal of Clinical Medicine
(1) Background: Catheter-directed therapies (CDT) may be considered for selected patients with pulmonary embolism (PE); (2) Methods: Retrospective observational study including all consecutive patients with acute PE undergoing CDT (mechanical or pharmacomechanical) from January 2010 through December 2020. The aim was to evaluate in-hospital and long-term mortality and its predictive factors; (3) Results: We included 63 patients, 43 (68.3%) with high-risk PE. All patients underwent mechanical CDT and, additionally, 27 (43%) underwent catheter-directed thrombolysis. Twelve (19%) patients received failed systemic thrombolysis (ST) prior to CDT, and an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter was inserted in 28 (44.5%) patients. In-hospital PE-related and allcause mortality rates were 31.7%; 95% CI 20.6-44.7% and 42.9%; 95% CI 30.5-56%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, age > 70 years and previous ST were strongly associated with PE-related and all-cause mortality, while IVC filter insertion during the CDT was associated with lower mortality rates. After a median follow-up of 40 (12-60) months, 11 more patients died (mortality rate of 60.3%; 95% CI 47.2-72.4%). Long-term survival was significantly higher in patients who received an IVC filter; (4) Conclusions: Age > 70 years and failure of previous ST were associated with mortality in acute PE patients treated with CDT. In-hospital and long-term mortality were lower in patients who received IVC filter insertion.
Thrombolytic Therapy and Mortality in Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism--Invited Commentary
2008
Background: In the management of acute pulmonary embolism, the prevalence of thrombolytic therapy is uncertain, and its benefits compared with standard anticoagulation remain a subject of debate. Methods: This analysis included 15 116 patient discharges with a primary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism from 186 acute care hospitals in Pennsylvania (January 2000 to November 2002). We compared propensity score-adjusted mortality between patients who received thrombolysis and those who did not, using logistic regression to model mortality within 30 days of presentation and Poisson regression to model in-hospital mortality. Results: Of the 15 116 patient discharges, only 356 (2.4%) received thrombolytic therapy. The overall 30-day mortality rate for patients who received thrombolytic therapy was 17.4% compared with 8.6% for those who did not. The corresponding in-hospital mortality rates were 19.6 and 8.3, respectively, per 1000 person-days. However, mortality risk associated with thrombolysis varied with the propensity to receive thrombolysis: the odds ratios of 30-day mortality were 2.8 (P =.007), 3.9 (PϽ.001), 1.8 (P =.09), 1.0 (P =.98), and 0.7 (P =.30) for patients in the lowest to the highest quintiles of the propensity score distribution who received thrombolysis. A similar pattern was observed in the risk ratios for in-hospital death. Conclusions: In this large sample of patients hospitalized for acute pulmonary embolism, thrombolytic therapy was used infrequently. Risk of in-hospital and 30-day mortality appears to be elevated for patients who were unlikely candidates for this therapy based on characteristics at presentation, but not for patients with a relatively high predicted probability of receiving thrombolysis.
Thrombolytic Therapy and Mortality in Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism
Archives of Internal Medicine, 2008
Background: In the management of acute pulmonary embolism, the prevalence of thrombolytic therapy is uncertain, and its benefits compared with standard anticoagulation remain a subject of debate. Methods: This analysis included 15 116 patient discharges with a primary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism from 186 acute care hospitals in Pennsylvania (January 2000 to November 2002). We compared propensity score-adjusted mortality between patients who received thrombolysis and those who did not, using logistic regression to model mortality within 30 days of presentation and Poisson regression to model in-hospital mortality. Results: Of the 15 116 patient discharges, only 356 (2.4%) received thrombolytic therapy. The overall 30-day mortality rate for patients who received thrombolytic therapy was 17.4% compared with 8.6% for those who did not. The corresponding in-hospital mortality rates were 19.6 and 8.3, respectively, per 1000 person-days. However, mortality risk associated with thrombolysis varied with the propensity to receive thrombolysis: the odds ratios of 30-day mortality were 2.8 (P =.007), 3.9 (PϽ.001), 1.8 (P =.09), 1.0 (P =.98), and 0.7 (P =.30) for patients in the lowest to the highest quintiles of the propensity score distribution who received thrombolysis. A similar pattern was observed in the risk ratios for in-hospital death. Conclusions: In this large sample of patients hospitalized for acute pulmonary embolism, thrombolytic therapy was used infrequently. Risk of in-hospital and 30-day mortality appears to be elevated for patients who were unlikely candidates for this therapy based on characteristics at presentation, but not for patients with a relatively high predicted probability of receiving thrombolysis.
The Journal of emergency medicine, 2017
Thrombolysis for the treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) has received significant attention in the literature over the past 10 years. Our primary objective was to examine the trend in thrombolysis use in the United States from 2006 to 2011. Secondary objectives include examining patient and hospital characteristics associated with receiving thrombolysis and rates of complications associated with thrombolysis. In this retrospective cohort study, we used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2006 to 2011 to identify patients with a diagnosis of PE who received or did not receive thrombolytic agents. Examining the records of 47,911,414 hospital discharges identified a cohort of 1,317,329 patients with PE; of these patients, 10,617 received thrombolysis. During the study period, there was a 30% relative increase in the use of thrombolysis, from 0.68% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.73%) to 0.89% (95% CI 0.83-0.95%; p < 0.01). After controlling for all factors in the model, facto...
Optional therapeutic management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism patients
The Moldovan Medical Journal, 2023
Background: Few studies have evaluated the thrombolytic treatment in patients with intermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism, making this study more valuable. Material and methods: It was a prospective, non-randomized, open-label, single-center study. Eligible patients at the age of 18 or older with an acute pulmonary embolism (PE) confirmed by CT pulmonary angiography with onset until 14 day and signs of right ventricular (RV) overload on echocardiography took part in the study. Pulmonary Arterial CT Obstruction Index Rate (PACTOIR) was used to define the localization and the expansion zone of thromboembolism. This study included 18 patients with intermediate risk and acute submassive pulmonary thromboembolism. In thrombolysis (TT) group (n=9) were used 50 mg of tissue-plasminogen activator (t-PA) administered in infusion as 0.4 mg/h for 2 hours. In the standard anticoagulation group, unfractioned heparin (UFH) was administered as a bolus of 70 units/kg or a maximum of 5000 units, followed by continuous infusion at an initial rate of 16 units/kg or a maximum of 1000 units/h. Results: The mean age for TT group was 69 vs 63 for the UFH group. PACTOIR was 100% in 3 patients in the half-dose rt-PA group and in 2 patients in the UFH group. RV/LV diameter ratio decreased from baseline to 48 h post-procedure (1.55 vs. 1.13; mean difference,-0.42; p < 0.0001). Mean pulmonary artery systolic pressure was 55 mm Hg in both groups (p < 0.05), with 53 [43-60] in TT group vs. 41.5 [37-45] mmHg in UFH group, P<0.05. Also, RV/ LV ratio and systolic PAP decreased significantly in both groups. Severe bleeding with a need in red blood cell transfusion was seen in 0.11% (1 patient) in the TT group vs 0 in UFH group. The hospitalization length of stay was significantly shorter in the TT group (3.8±1.8, p < 0.05). The rate of secondary endpoints was significantly higher in the UFH group with a high rate of pulmonary hypertension (0 vs. 19%, p=0.003). Conclusions: Half-dose thrombolytic therapy in patients diagnosed with submassive pulmonary embolism significantly reduced death and hemodynamic decompensation in the first 7 days compared to anticoagulant therapy only. With all that being said, it can be concluded that patients with high-intermediate risk PE could benefit from reduced-dose TT.
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 2017
Essentials • Clinical benefit of hospitalization vs. outpatient treatment in pulmonary embolism (PE) is unknown. • We performed a propensity matched cohort study of hemodynamically stable PE patients. • Regardless of the risk assessment, hospitalized patients had the highest rate of adverse event. • If confirmed, ambulatory care of normotensive PE patients may be preferred whenever possible. Summary. Background: The decision to hospitalize or not patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is controversial. Despite the advantages of close monitoring, hospitalization by itself may lead to in-hospital complications and potentially worsen the prognosis of PE patients. Objectives: To determine the net clinical benefit of hospitalization vs. outpatient management of normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Methods: Retrospective cohort propensity score analysis (radius marching with replacement). Hemodynamically stable PE patients treated as outpatients or inpatients were matched to balance out differences for 28 patient characteristics and known risk factors for adverse events. The primary outcome was the rate of adverse events at 14 days, including recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding or death. Results: Among 1127 eligible patients, 1081 were included in the matched cohort, 576 treated as inpatients and 505 as outpatients. The 14-day rate of adverse events was 13.0% for inpatients and 3.3% for outpatients (adjusted OR, 5.07; 95% CI, 1.68-15.28). The 3-month rate was 21.7% for inpatients and 6.9% for outpatients (OR, 4.90; 95% CI, 2.62-9.17). In the high-risk subgroup (Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index class III-V; n = 597), the 14-day rate of adverse events was 16.5% for hospitalized patients vs. 4.5% for outpatients (OR, 4.16; 95% CI, 1.2-14.35). Conclusion: Outpatient treatment of hemodynamically stable PE patients seems to be associated with a lower rate of adverse events than hospitalization and, if confirmed, may be considered as first-line management in patients not requiring specific in-hospital care, regardless of their initial risk stratification, if proper outpatient care can be provided.
Interventional therapy of acute pulmonary embolism: where are we and where are we heading towards?
Journal of Transcatheter Interventions, 2022
This life-threatening condition, known as pulmonary embolism, is prevalent throughout the world, affecting a large percentage of population and representing one of the leading causes of cardiovascular death. To reduce mortality and morbidity and improve outcomes, early risk stratification is critical. There is a wide range in the severity of a pulmonary embolism, from mild to life-threatening. When a patient has a high-risk pulmonary embolism and is in shock or cardiac arrest, emergency systemic thrombolysis or embolectomy is reasonable, but anticoagulation alone has great results in low-risk pulmonary embolism. Multiple strategies exist to capture the benefits of thrombolysis while minimizing its risks, but clinical experience with such novel intervention strategies is limited. The pulmonary embolism response team comprises interventional cardiologist, interventional radiologist, cardiac surgeon, cardiac radiologist, and critical care specialist, can help determine the type of intervention in a given patient. This article provides an outline of current endovascular interventional therapies and their context.