Robert S Zhang, Eugene Yuriditsky, Peter Zhang, Lindsay Elbaum, Eric Bailey, Muhammad H Maqsood, Radu Postelnicu, Nancy E Amoroso, Thomas S Maldonado, Muhamed Saric, Carlos L Alviar, James M Horowitz, Sripal Bangalore
{"title":"比较血栓在途患者的管理策略","authors":"Robert S Zhang, Eugene Yuriditsky, Peter Zhang, Lindsay Elbaum, Eric Bailey, Muhammad H Maqsood, Radu Postelnicu, Nancy E Amoroso, Thomas S Maldonado, Muhamed Saric, Carlos L Alviar, James M Horowitz, Sripal Bangalore","doi":"10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clot-in-transit is associated with high mortality, but optimal management strategies remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies in patients with clot-in-transit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective study of patients with documented clot-in-transit in the right heart on echocardiography across 2 institutions between January 2020 and October 2023. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic decompensation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 35 patients included in the study, 10 patients (28.6%) received anticoagulation alone and 2 patients (5.7%) received systemic thrombolysis, while 23 patients (65.7%) underwent catheter-based therapy (CBT; 22 mechanical thrombectomy and 1 catheter-directed thrombolysis). Over a median follow-up of 30 days, 9 patients (25.7%) experienced the primary composite outcome. Compared with anticoagulation alone, patients who received CBT or systemic thrombolysis had significantly lower rates of the primary composite outcome (12% versus 60%; log-rank <i>P</i><0.001; hazard ratio, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.03-0.54]; <i>P</i>=0.005) including a lower rate of death (8% versus 50%; hazard ratio, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.02-0.55]; <i>P</i>=0.008), resuscitated cardiac arrest (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01-1.15]; <i>P</i>=0.067), or hemodynamic deterioration (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01-1.15]; <i>P</i>=0.067).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study of CBT in patients with clot-in-transit, CBT or systemic thrombolysis was associated with a significantly lower rate of adverse clinical outcomes, including a lower rate of death compared with anticoagulation alone driven by the CBT group. CBT has the potential to improve outcomes. Further large-scale studies are needed to test these associations.</p>","PeriodicalId":10330,"journal":{"name":"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Management Strategies in Patients With Clot-in-Transit.\",\"authors\":\"Robert S Zhang, Eugene Yuriditsky, Peter Zhang, Lindsay Elbaum, Eric Bailey, Muhammad H Maqsood, Radu Postelnicu, Nancy E Amoroso, Thomas S Maldonado, Muhamed Saric, Carlos L Alviar, James M Horowitz, Sripal Bangalore\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clot-in-transit is associated with high mortality, but optimal management strategies remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies in patients with clot-in-transit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective study of patients with documented clot-in-transit in the right heart on echocardiography across 2 institutions between January 2020 and October 2023. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic decompensation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 35 patients included in the study, 10 patients (28.6%) received anticoagulation alone and 2 patients (5.7%) received systemic thrombolysis, while 23 patients (65.7%) underwent catheter-based therapy (CBT; 22 mechanical thrombectomy and 1 catheter-directed thrombolysis). Over a median follow-up of 30 days, 9 patients (25.7%) experienced the primary composite outcome. Compared with anticoagulation alone, patients who received CBT or systemic thrombolysis had significantly lower rates of the primary composite outcome (12% versus 60%; log-rank <i>P</i><0.001; hazard ratio, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.03-0.54]; <i>P</i>=0.005) including a lower rate of death (8% versus 50%; hazard ratio, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.02-0.55]; <i>P</i>=0.008), resuscitated cardiac arrest (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01-1.15]; <i>P</i>=0.067), or hemodynamic deterioration (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01-1.15]; <i>P</i>=0.067).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study of CBT in patients with clot-in-transit, CBT or systemic thrombolysis was associated with a significantly lower rate of adverse clinical outcomes, including a lower rate of death compared with anticoagulation alone driven by the CBT group. CBT has the potential to improve outcomes. Further large-scale studies are needed to test these associations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10330,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014109\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014109","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing Management Strategies in Patients With Clot-in-Transit.
Background: Clot-in-transit is associated with high mortality, but optimal management strategies remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies in patients with clot-in-transit.
Methods: This is a retrospective study of patients with documented clot-in-transit in the right heart on echocardiography across 2 institutions between January 2020 and October 2023. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic decompensation.
Results: Among 35 patients included in the study, 10 patients (28.6%) received anticoagulation alone and 2 patients (5.7%) received systemic thrombolysis, while 23 patients (65.7%) underwent catheter-based therapy (CBT; 22 mechanical thrombectomy and 1 catheter-directed thrombolysis). Over a median follow-up of 30 days, 9 patients (25.7%) experienced the primary composite outcome. Compared with anticoagulation alone, patients who received CBT or systemic thrombolysis had significantly lower rates of the primary composite outcome (12% versus 60%; log-rank P<0.001; hazard ratio, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.03-0.54]; P=0.005) including a lower rate of death (8% versus 50%; hazard ratio, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.02-0.55]; P=0.008), resuscitated cardiac arrest (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01-1.15]; P=0.067), or hemodynamic deterioration (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01-1.15]; P=0.067).
Conclusions: In this study of CBT in patients with clot-in-transit, CBT or systemic thrombolysis was associated with a significantly lower rate of adverse clinical outcomes, including a lower rate of death compared with anticoagulation alone driven by the CBT group. CBT has the potential to improve outcomes. Further large-scale studies are needed to test these associations.
期刊介绍:
Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, an American Heart Association journal, focuses on interventional techniques pertaining to coronary artery disease, structural heart disease, and vascular disease, with priority placed on original research and on randomized trials and large registry studies. In addition, pharmacological, diagnostic, and pathophysiological aspects of interventional cardiology are given special attention in this online-only journal.