Comparison of catheter-directed thrombolysis and anticoagulation in intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism: A retrospective analysis

IF 0.1 Q4 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
D. Omaygenç, M. Omaygenc
{"title":"Comparison of catheter-directed thrombolysis and anticoagulation in intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism: A retrospective analysis","authors":"D. Omaygenç, M. Omaygenc","doi":"10.4103/ejop.ejop_73_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The selection of escalation of care strategies for the treatment of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is a matter of debate. Here, we aimed to assess the features of our population treated either with anticoagulation (AC) alone or catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). We also sought to identify a relationship between high residual systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) and demographic and clinical variables. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The retrospective data of 30 intermediate-high-risk PE patients were analyzed. CDT was used in 14 (46.7%) cases. Enoxaparin (b. i. d) injections were administered in the AC group. In the CDT group, patients received 5 mg bolus dose of alteplase followed by 1 mg/h infusion for 24 h. Estimated sPAP at presentation and discharge was recorded. A value equal to or greater than 40 mmHg in the latter was accepted as a significant rise. RESULTS: The patients in the CDT group had a lower HAS-BLED score (2 [0–3] vs. 1 [0–3], P = 0.03). Although initial sPAP values were comparable among treatment arms, sPAP at discharge was significantly lower in the CDT group (mmHg, 42 ± 11.2 vs. 33.6 ± 9.7, P = 0.04). The reduction in sPAP at discharge was also significantly higher in this group. The degree of reduction in sPAP was considerably correlated with baseline sPAP (r: 63.2, P < 0.001). Finally, the baseline sPAP measurement and HAS-BLED score of the patients with high residual sPAP were significantly higher (56.6 ± 13.1 vs. 67.3 ± 11.3, P = 0.02, and 1 [0–3] vs. 2 [0–3], P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSION: CDT was preferred over AC when lower bleeding risk was anticipated for intermediate-high-risk PE patients in our sample population. Eventually, CDT provided lower discharge sPAP levels and a greater reduction in sPAP. However, the factors associated with high sPAP at discharge were only high baseline sPAP measurement and HAS-BLED score.","PeriodicalId":42933,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Journal of Pulmonology","volume":"23 1","pages":"50 - 58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Journal of Pulmonology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ejop.ejop_73_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The selection of escalation of care strategies for the treatment of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is a matter of debate. Here, we aimed to assess the features of our population treated either with anticoagulation (AC) alone or catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). We also sought to identify a relationship between high residual systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) and demographic and clinical variables. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The retrospective data of 30 intermediate-high-risk PE patients were analyzed. CDT was used in 14 (46.7%) cases. Enoxaparin (b. i. d) injections were administered in the AC group. In the CDT group, patients received 5 mg bolus dose of alteplase followed by 1 mg/h infusion for 24 h. Estimated sPAP at presentation and discharge was recorded. A value equal to or greater than 40 mmHg in the latter was accepted as a significant rise. RESULTS: The patients in the CDT group had a lower HAS-BLED score (2 [0–3] vs. 1 [0–3], P = 0.03). Although initial sPAP values were comparable among treatment arms, sPAP at discharge was significantly lower in the CDT group (mmHg, 42 ± 11.2 vs. 33.6 ± 9.7, P = 0.04). The reduction in sPAP at discharge was also significantly higher in this group. The degree of reduction in sPAP was considerably correlated with baseline sPAP (r: 63.2, P < 0.001). Finally, the baseline sPAP measurement and HAS-BLED score of the patients with high residual sPAP were significantly higher (56.6 ± 13.1 vs. 67.3 ± 11.3, P = 0.02, and 1 [0–3] vs. 2 [0–3], P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSION: CDT was preferred over AC when lower bleeding risk was anticipated for intermediate-high-risk PE patients in our sample population. Eventually, CDT provided lower discharge sPAP levels and a greater reduction in sPAP. However, the factors associated with high sPAP at discharge were only high baseline sPAP measurement and HAS-BLED score.
导管溶栓与抗凝治疗中危肺栓塞的比较:回顾性分析
背景与目的:中度危险肺栓塞(PE)治疗的升级护理策略的选择是一个有争议的问题。在这里,我们旨在评估单独抗凝(AC)或导管定向溶栓(CDT)治疗人群的特征。我们还试图确定高残余收缩期肺动脉压(sPAP)与人口统计学和临床变量之间的关系。患者与方法:对30例中高危PE患者的回顾性资料进行分析。CDT 14例(46.7%)。AC组给予依诺肝素(b.i.d)注射。在CDT组,患者接受5mg阿替普酶的单剂量,然后1mg /h的输注,持续24小时。记录出现和出院时的估计sPAP。后者的值等于或大于40mmhg被认为是显著升高。结果:CDT组患者的ha - bled评分较低(2[0-3]比1 [0-3],P = 0.03)。尽管各治疗组的初始sPAP值相当,但CDT组出院时sPAP明显较低(mmHg, 42±11.2比33.6±9.7,P = 0.04)。出院时sPAP的减少在该组中也明显更高。sPAP降低程度与基线sPAP显著相关(r: 63.2, P < 0.001)。最后,高残留sPAP患者的基线sPAP测量值和ha - bled评分均显著高于对照组(56.6±13.1比67.3±11.3,P = 0.02, 1[0-3]比2 [0-3],P = 0.02)。结论:在我们的样本人群中,当预期中高危PE患者出血风险较低时,CDT优于AC。最终,CDT提供了更低的放电sPAP水平和更大的sPAP降低。然而,与出院时高sPAP相关的因素仅为高基线sPAP测量和HAS-BLED评分。
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
Eurasian Journal of Pulmonology
Eurasian Journal of Pulmonology RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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