Reperfusion therapies in patients with intermediateand high-risk pulmonary embolism: insights from a multicenter registry

Carlos Real, Carlos Ferrera, M. Vázquez-Álvarez, Mike Huanca, Francisco J. Noriega, Enrique Gutierrez-Ibanes, Ana María Mañas-Hernández, Noemí Ramos-López, Miriam Juárez, P. Jiménez-Quevedo, Jaime Elízaga, Ana Viana-Tejedor, Pablo Salinas
{"title":"Reperfusion therapies in patients with intermediateand high-risk pulmonary embolism: insights from a multicenter registry","authors":"Carlos Real, Carlos Ferrera, M. Vázquez-Álvarez, Mike Huanca, Francisco J. Noriega, Enrique Gutierrez-Ibanes, Ana María Mañas-Hernández, Noemí Ramos-López, Miriam Juárez, P. Jiménez-Quevedo, Jaime Elízaga, Ana Viana-Tejedor, Pablo Salinas","doi":"10.24875/recice.m24000452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and objectives: Most patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) receive anticoagulation only. Reperfusion is required in high-risk and a minority of intermediate-risk PE patients. Systemic thrombolysis (ST) is the first-line reperfusion therapy, but due to contraindications and major bleeding concerns, the use of catheter-directed therapies (CDT) is increasing as a suitable alternative. The objective of the present study was to detect predictors of the use of CDT compared with other therapies in patients with acute PE. Methods: This registry included consecutive intermediate-and high-risk PE patients in 2 tertiary centers with a 24/7 PE response team from 2014 to 2022. The patients were grouped according to the primary treatment: anticoagulation only, CDT, or ST. We evaluated predictors of treatment assignment and safety endpoints. Results: A total of 274 patients were included. Of them, 112 received anticoagulation only, 96 received ST as the primary treatment, and 66 underwent CDT first. Comorbidities were higher in the CDT group than in the other 2 groups. Patients undergoing ST/CDT had higher PE severity parameters at hospital admission. On multivariable analysis, independent predictors for the use of CDT were Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR, 1.29; 95%CI, 1.05-1.59), recent surgery (OR, 11.07; 95%CI, 3.07-39.87), and bilateral central PE (OR, 2.42; 95%CI, 1.10-5.32). Analysis of early safety outcomes showed that intracranial bleeding occurred only in the ST group (1.8% of patients). Conclusions: This contemporary registry used CDT as the primary treatment in 24% of intermediate-and high-risk patients, mainly in comorbid and postsurgical patients. CDT was a safe and effective alternative to medical therapy in selected patients.","PeriodicalId":509332,"journal":{"name":"REC: interventional cardiology (English Edition)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REC: interventional cardiology (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24875/recice.m24000452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: Most patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) receive anticoagulation only. Reperfusion is required in high-risk and a minority of intermediate-risk PE patients. Systemic thrombolysis (ST) is the first-line reperfusion therapy, but due to contraindications and major bleeding concerns, the use of catheter-directed therapies (CDT) is increasing as a suitable alternative. The objective of the present study was to detect predictors of the use of CDT compared with other therapies in patients with acute PE. Methods: This registry included consecutive intermediate-and high-risk PE patients in 2 tertiary centers with a 24/7 PE response team from 2014 to 2022. The patients were grouped according to the primary treatment: anticoagulation only, CDT, or ST. We evaluated predictors of treatment assignment and safety endpoints. Results: A total of 274 patients were included. Of them, 112 received anticoagulation only, 96 received ST as the primary treatment, and 66 underwent CDT first. Comorbidities were higher in the CDT group than in the other 2 groups. Patients undergoing ST/CDT had higher PE severity parameters at hospital admission. On multivariable analysis, independent predictors for the use of CDT were Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR, 1.29; 95%CI, 1.05-1.59), recent surgery (OR, 11.07; 95%CI, 3.07-39.87), and bilateral central PE (OR, 2.42; 95%CI, 1.10-5.32). Analysis of early safety outcomes showed that intracranial bleeding occurred only in the ST group (1.8% of patients). Conclusions: This contemporary registry used CDT as the primary treatment in 24% of intermediate-and high-risk patients, mainly in comorbid and postsurgical patients. CDT was a safe and effective alternative to medical therapy in selected patients.
中高危肺栓塞患者的再灌注疗法:多中心登记的启示
引言和目的:大多数急性肺栓塞(PE)患者仅接受抗凝治疗。高危和少数中危 PE 患者需要再灌注治疗。全身溶栓疗法(ST)是一线再灌注疗法,但由于存在禁忌症和大出血问题,导管导向疗法(CDT)作为一种合适的替代疗法的使用率正在上升。本研究旨在检测急性 PE 患者使用 CDT 与其他疗法相比的预测因素。方法:这项登记研究纳入了 2014 年至 2022 年期间在两家拥有全天候 PE 反应团队的三级医疗中心连续就诊的中危和高危 PE 患者。患者根据主要治疗方法分组:仅抗凝、CDT 或 ST。我们评估了治疗分配的预测因素和安全性终点。结果共纳入 274 名患者。其中 112 人仅接受了抗凝治疗,96 人接受了 ST 作为主要治疗方法,66 人首先接受了 CDT。CDT 组的合并症高于其他两组。接受 ST/CDT 治疗的患者入院时的 PE 严重程度参数较高。多变量分析显示,使用 CDT 的独立预测因素包括:Charlson 合并症指数(OR,1.29;95%CI,1.05-1.59)、近期手术(OR,11.07;95%CI,3.07-39.87)和双侧中心性 PE(OR,2.42;95%CI,1.10-5.32)。对早期安全性结果的分析表明,只有 ST 组(1.8% 的患者)发生了颅内出血。结论:这项当代登记研究将 CDT 作为 24% 中高风险患者的主要治疗方法,主要用于合并症患者和手术后患者。对于选定的患者,CDT是一种安全有效的药物治疗替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信