Outcomes of Mechanical Thrombectomy Compared With Systemic Thrombolysis in Pulmonary Embolism: A Comprehensive Evaluation From the National Inpatient Sample Database.

IF 1.7 2区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Journal of Endovascular Therapy Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-02 DOI:10.1177/15266028221138020
Yasser Al-Khadra, Venkata Missula, Basma Al-Bast, Prashanth Singanallur, Raad Al Tamimi, Nour Albast, Manasik Abdu, Radhika Deshpande, Mohsin Salih, Peter White, Mehdi H Shishehbor, Abdul Moiz Hafiz
{"title":"Outcomes of Mechanical Thrombectomy Compared With Systemic Thrombolysis in Pulmonary Embolism: A Comprehensive Evaluation From the National Inpatient Sample Database.","authors":"Yasser Al-Khadra, Venkata Missula, Basma Al-Bast, Prashanth Singanallur, Raad Al Tamimi, Nour Albast, Manasik Abdu, Radhika Deshpande, Mohsin Salih, Peter White, Mehdi H Shishehbor, Abdul Moiz Hafiz","doi":"10.1177/15266028221138020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Systemic thrombolysis (ST) may not be ideal for many patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) due to bleeding risk. In this analysis, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) as an alternative to ST for acute PE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent MT and/or ST for PE were identified from the National Inpatient Sample database from 2016 to 2017. Patients who underwent catheter-directed thrombolysis were excluded. We compared in-hospital outcomes of both groups in this retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 16 890 patients who received an intervention for acute PE, 1380 (8.2%) received MT and 15 510 (91.8%) received ST. There was no difference in age between both groups. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients who received MT than that in those who received ST (11.9% vs 20.6%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29-0.93, p=0.028). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of periprocedural bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and acute kidney injury between the 2 groups (p≥0.608 for all). Patients who received MT had a higher rate of respiratory complications (19.0% vs 11.6%, OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.06-3.03, p=0.030) and discharge to an outside facility (34.1% vs 19.2%, OR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.41-3.37, p<0.001) than those who received ST.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mortality was significantly lower with MT than that with ST, but larger randomized studies are needed to validate this. The use of MT should be individualized on the basis of the patients' clinical presentation, risk profile, and local resources.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>In this study, we utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to study the in-hospital outcomes of pulmonary embolism patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy compared to those who underwent systemic thrombolysis. We found that the patients who were diagnosed with pulmonary embolism and underwent mechanical thrombectomy had significantly lower mortality compared to those who were treated using systemic thrombolysis. This study was the first of its kind, utilizing the national inpatient sample database for evaluation of mechanical thrombectomy in comparison with the standard of care. These result would direct further randomized controlled trials for better evaluation of the utilization of mechanical thrombectomy in the correct clinical context. Furthermore, our study demonstrated comparable peri-operative complications between the mechanical thrombectomy group and the systemic thrombolysis group. These results would direct clinicians to consider mechanical thrombectomy if clinically indicated given the promising results.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028221138020","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Systemic thrombolysis (ST) may not be ideal for many patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) due to bleeding risk. In this analysis, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) as an alternative to ST for acute PE.

Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent MT and/or ST for PE were identified from the National Inpatient Sample database from 2016 to 2017. Patients who underwent catheter-directed thrombolysis were excluded. We compared in-hospital outcomes of both groups in this retrospective study.

Results: Of 16 890 patients who received an intervention for acute PE, 1380 (8.2%) received MT and 15 510 (91.8%) received ST. There was no difference in age between both groups. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients who received MT than that in those who received ST (11.9% vs 20.6%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29-0.93, p=0.028). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of periprocedural bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and acute kidney injury between the 2 groups (p≥0.608 for all). Patients who received MT had a higher rate of respiratory complications (19.0% vs 11.6%, OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.06-3.03, p=0.030) and discharge to an outside facility (34.1% vs 19.2%, OR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.41-3.37, p<0.001) than those who received ST.

Conclusion: Mortality was significantly lower with MT than that with ST, but larger randomized studies are needed to validate this. The use of MT should be individualized on the basis of the patients' clinical presentation, risk profile, and local resources.

Clinical impact: In this study, we utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to study the in-hospital outcomes of pulmonary embolism patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy compared to those who underwent systemic thrombolysis. We found that the patients who were diagnosed with pulmonary embolism and underwent mechanical thrombectomy had significantly lower mortality compared to those who were treated using systemic thrombolysis. This study was the first of its kind, utilizing the national inpatient sample database for evaluation of mechanical thrombectomy in comparison with the standard of care. These result would direct further randomized controlled trials for better evaluation of the utilization of mechanical thrombectomy in the correct clinical context. Furthermore, our study demonstrated comparable peri-operative complications between the mechanical thrombectomy group and the systemic thrombolysis group. These results would direct clinicians to consider mechanical thrombectomy if clinically indicated given the promising results.

肺栓塞机械取栓术与全身溶栓治疗的疗效对比:来自全国住院病人抽样数据库的综合评估。
背景:由于出血风险,全身溶栓(ST)可能不是许多急性肺栓塞(PE)患者的理想选择。在这项分析中,我们评估了机械性血栓切除术(MT)作为ST治疗急性肺栓塞的替代方案的安全性和有效性:从2016年至2017年全国住院患者抽样数据库中确定了因PE接受MT和/或ST治疗的年龄≥18岁的患者。排除了接受导管引导溶栓治疗的患者。在这项回顾性研究中,我们比较了两组患者的院内预后:在16 890名接受急性PE介入治疗的患者中,1380人(8.2%)接受了MT治疗,15 510人(91.8%)接受了ST治疗。两组患者的年龄没有差异。接受 MT 治疗的患者的院内死亡率明显低于接受 ST 治疗的患者(11.9% vs 20.6%,赔率比 [OR]:0.52,95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.29-0.93, p=0.028).两组患者在围手术期出血、颅内出血和急性肾损伤方面的差异无统计学意义(均为P≥0.608)。接受MT治疗的患者呼吸系统并发症发生率更高(19.0% vs 11.6%,OR:1.79,95% CI:1.06-3.03,P=0.030),出院到外部机构的发生率更高(34.1% vs 19.2%,OR:2.18,95% CI:1.41-3.37,P结论:MT 的死亡率明显低于 ST,但需要更大规模的随机研究来验证。MT 的使用应根据患者的临床表现、风险状况和当地资源进行个体化:在这项研究中,我们利用全国住院患者抽样数据库研究了接受机械取栓术的肺栓塞患者与接受全身溶栓术的患者的院内预后。我们发现,与接受全身溶栓治疗的患者相比,确诊为肺栓塞并接受机械性血栓切除术的患者死亡率明显较低。这项研究是首次利用全国住院病人抽样数据库对机械取栓术与标准疗法进行比较评估。这些结果将指导进一步的随机对照试验,以更好地评估在正确的临床环境中使用机械溶栓术的情况。此外,我们的研究表明,机械性血栓切除术组与全身溶栓组的围手术期并发症相当。这些结果将指导临床医生在有临床指征的情况下考虑进行机械性血栓切除术,因为其结果很有希望。
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
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.
×
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