Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) ; 79(9):3189-3189, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1751495
2.
Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med ; 23(7): 44, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1230291

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) remains an important cause of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in the USA and worldwide. Catheter-based therapies are emerging as a new armamentarium for improving outcomes in these patients. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to familiarize the clinicians with (1) various types of catheter-based modalities available for patients with acute PE, (2) advantages, disadvantages, and appropriate patient selection for the use of these devices, and (3) evidence base and the relevance of such therapies in the COVID-19 pandemic. RECENT FINDINGS: There are four main types of catheter-based therapies in acute PE: (1) standard catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), (2) ultrasound-assisted CDT, (3) pharmacomechanical CDT, and (4) mechanical thrombectomy without thrombolysis. Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis is the most widely studied modality in this group; however, evidence base for other catheter-based technologies is rapidly emerging. SUMMARY: Current use of catheter-based therapies is most suitable for patients with intermediate and high-risk acute PE. The adoption of a multidisciplinary approach like the pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) is desirable for appropriate patient selection and possibly/potentially improving patient outcomes. We discuss the current status of these therapies.

3.
JACC Case Rep ; 2(12): 2016-2020, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-872176

ABSTRACT

We present the characteristics and outcomes of the first 2 cases of catheter-directed thrombolysis performed in patients presenting with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)-related iliocaval thrombosis. (Level of Difficulty: Beginner.).

4.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 9(3): 585-591.e2, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-813723

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Infection with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has been associated with a hypercoagulable state. Emerging data from China and Europe have consistently shown an increased incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to identify the VTE incidence and early predictors of VTE at our high-volume tertiary care center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 147 patients who had been admitted to Temple University Hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from April 1, 2020 to April 27, 2020. We first identified the VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]) incidence in our cohort. The VTE and no-VTE groups were compared by univariable analysis for demographics, comorbidities, laboratory data, and treatment outcomes. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the early predictors of VTE. RESULTS: The 147 patients (20.9% of all admissions) admitted to a designated COVID-19 unit at Temple University Hospital with a high clinical suspicion of acute VTE had undergone testing for VTE using computed tomography pulmonary angiography and/or extremity venous duplex ultrasonography. The overall incidence of VTE was 17% (25 of 147). Of the 25 patients, 16 had had acute PE, 14 had had acute DVT, and 5 had had both PE and DVT. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 3.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-9.55) and the admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL (adjusted odds ratio, 3.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-9.78) were independent markers associated with VTE. The all-cause mortality in the VTE group was greater than that in the non-VTE group (48% vs 22%; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Our study represents one of the earliest reported from the United States on the incidence rate of VTE in patients with COVID-19. Patients with a high clinical suspicion and the identified risk factors (invasive mechanical ventilation, admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL) should be considered for early VTE testing. We did not screen all patients admitted for VTE; therefore, the true incidence of VTE could have been underestimated. Our findings require confirmation in future prospective studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Pulmonary Embolism , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Venous Thrombosis , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Computed Tomography Angiography/methods , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Philadelphia/epidemiology , Prognosis , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombophilia/blood , Thrombophilia/diagnosis , Thrombophilia/etiology , Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex/methods , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/epidemiology , Venous Thrombosis/etiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL