ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Compare in-hospital outcomes of patients treated with either mechanical thrombectomy (MT) or catheter directed lysis (CDL) in treatment of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MT or CDL for acute PE between 2014 and 2021. The primary outcome was the composite of in-hospital death, significant bleed, vascular complication, or need for mechanical support post-procedure. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the composite outcome in addition to blood transfusions, invasive hemodynamics, echocardiographic data, and intensive care unit (ICU) utilization. RESULTS: 458 patients were treated for PE with 266 patients in the CDL arm and 192 patients in the MT arm. The primary composite endpoint was not significantly different between the two groups with CDL 12% versus MT 11% (p = 0.5). There was a significant difference in total length of ICU time required with more in the CDL group versus MT (3.8 ± 2.0 vs. 2.8 ± 3.0 days, p = 0.009). All other secondary end points showed no significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing catheter directed treatment of PE, there was no difference between MT and CDL in terms of in-hospital mortality, bleeds, catheter-related complications, and hemodynamics.
Subject(s)
Pulmonary Embolism , Thrombolytic Therapy , Humans , Thrombolytic Therapy/methods , Retrospective Studies , Hospital Mortality , Treatment Outcome , Pulmonary Embolism/therapy , Pulmonary Embolism/drug therapy , Thrombectomy/adverse effects , Thrombectomy/methods , Catheters , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Fibrinolytic Agents/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hands-on defibrillation (HOD) could theoretically improve the efficacy of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) though a few mechanisms. Polyethylene drapes could potentially facilitate safe HOD, but questions remain about the effects of CPR on polyethylene's conductance and the magnitude of current looping through rescuers' arms in contact with patients. METHODS: This study measured the leakage current through 2 mil (0.002 in.) polyethylene through two different current pathways before and after 30 min of continuous compressions on a CPR mannequin. The two pathways analyzed were the standardized IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) leakage current analysis and a setup analyzing a current pathway looping through a rescuer's arms and returning to the patient. First, ten measurements involving the two pathways were obtained on a single polyethylene drape. 30 min of continuous compressions were applied to the drape on a CPR mannequin after which the ten measurements were repeated. RESULTS: Twenty patients undergoing elective cardioversion for atrial fibrillation (18/20) or atrial flutter (2/20) at Emory University Hospital underwent analysis all receiving 200 J shocks (age 38-101, 35% female). Through the IEC measurement method the peak leakage current mean was 0.70 +/- 0.02 mA before compressions and 0.59 +/- 0.19 mA after compressions. Only three of the ten measurements assessing current passing through a rescuer's arms had detectable current and each was of low magnitude. All measurements were well below the maximum IEC recommendations of 3.5 mA RMS and 5.0 mA peak. CONCLUSIONS: Polyethylene may facilitate safe HOD even after long durations of compressions. Current looping through a rescuer's arms is likely of insignificant magnitude.
Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Electric Countershock/methods , Heart Massage/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Electric Injuries/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Manikins , Middle Aged , Polyethylene/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Interruptions in compressions reducethe efficacy of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and are inevitable during hands-off periods for shocks. Clinical exam gloves were found to facilitate safe contact with patients during shock delivery but the safety of this practice has been questioned. Polyethylene is of interest because of its safety record in the medical arena and its electrical insulation properties. METHODS: This study measured the current leak through 2 mil (0.002 inch) polyethylene drapes during shock delivery. The current leak was assessed by measurement of voltage changes in a circuit recommended by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) for current leak safety testing. Current flowed off the drape, through the circuit and to electric ground in a manner consistent with standardized testing. Perceptibility was assessed in a subset with the investigator's bare hands pressed into the drape during shock delivery. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients undergoing elective cardioversion at Emory University Hospital underwent analysis (age 23-90, 36% female). Biphasic energies were 200-360 J. The root mean square (RMS) current leak averaged 0.072 ± 0.022 mA and peak current leak averaged 0.67 ± 0.21 which is well below IEC recommendations of 3.5 mA RMS and 5.0 mA peak. Finally, no instances of dielectric breakdown occurred and no shocks were perceptible. CONCLUSIONS: Polyethylene is a common medical material which may facilitate safe hands-on defibrillation. Our data illustrates that a thin, semitransparent layer of polyethylene is a safe and feasible adjunct to cardiac arrest kits to allow continued compressions and simplification of the CPR process.
