Institutional trends over a decade in catheter-directed interventions for pulmonary embolism.

OBJECTIVE: Catheter-directed interventions (CDIs) are commonly performed for acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The evolving catheter types and treatment algorithms impact the use and outcomes of these interventions. This study aimed to investigate the changes in CDI practice and their impact on outcomes. METHODS: Patients who underwent CDIs for PE between 2010 and 2019 at a single institution were identified from a prospectively maintained database. A PE team was launched in 2012, and in 2014 was established as an official Pulmonary Embolism Response Team. CDI annual use trends and clinical failures were recorded. Clinical success was defined as physiologic improvement in the absence of major bleeding, perioperative stroke or other procedure-related adverse event, decompensation for submassive or persistent shock for massive PE, the need for surgical thromboembolectomy, or death. Major bleeding was defined as requiring a blood transfusion, a surgical intervention, or suffering from an intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: There were 372 patients who underwent a CDI for acute PE during the study period with a mean age of 58.9 ± 15.4 years; there were males 187 (50.3%) and 340 patients has a submassive PE (91.4%). CDI showed a steep increase in the early Pulmonary Embolism Response Team years, peaking in 2016 with a subsequent decrease. Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis was the predominant CDI technique peaking at 84% of all CDI in 2014. Suction thrombectomy use peaked at 15.2% of CDI in 2019. The mean alteplase dose with catheter thrombolysis techniques decreased from 26.8 ± 12.5 mg in 2013 to 13.9 ± 7.5 mg in 2019 (P < .001). The mean lysis time decreased from 17.2 ± 8.3 hours in 2013 to 11.3 ± 8.2 hours in 2019 (P < .001). Clinical success for the massive and the submassive PE cohorts was 58.1% and 91.2%, respectively; the major bleed rates were 25.0% and 5.3%. There were two major clinical success peaks, one in 2015 mirroring our technical learning curve and one in 2019 mirroring our patient selection learning curve. The clinical success decrease in 2018 was primarily derived from blood transfusions owing to acute blood loss during suction thrombectomy. CONCLUSIONS: CDIs for acute PE have rapidly evolved with high success rates. Multidisciplinary approaches among centers with appropriate expertise are advisable for the safe and successful implementation of catheter interventions.

Pulmonary artery catheterization use and mortality in hospitalizations with HFrEF and HFpEF: A nationally representative trend analysis from 2005 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to analyze the trends in use of pulmonary artery catheterization (PAC) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and adjusted mortality from 2005 to 2014 using National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. METHODS: The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) diagnostic codes were used to identify patients with HFrEF and HFpEF from the National Inpatient Sample database. RESULTS: We identified a total of 3,225,529 hospitalizations with HFrEF and 3,419,834 hospitalizations with HFpEF. Per 1000 hospitalizations, use of PAC declined from 2005 to 2010 in both HFrEF (12.9 to 7.9, Ptrend < 0.001) and HFpEF (12.9 to 5.5, Ptrend < 0.001). However, from 2010 to 2014, the use of PAC per 1000 hospitalizations increased in both HFrEF (7.9 to 9.7, Ptrend < 0.001) and HFpEF (5.5 to 6.7, Ptrend < 0.001). We noted a temporal decline in risk-adjusted mortality during the study period for HFrEF (odds ratio, 3.93 in 2005-06 to 2.7 in 2013-14, Ptrend < 0.001) and HFpEF (odd ratio, 2.72 in 2005-06 to 2.62 in 2013-14, Ptrend < 0.001). The length of stay and cost were significantly higher with PAC use in both HFrEF and HFpEF. CONCLUSION: The use of PAC declined from 2005 to 2010 in both HFrEF and HFpEF but has since increased from 2010 to 2014 in both HFrEF and HFpEF. There is also a temporal decline in excess mortality associated with PAC use in both HFrEF and HFpEF from 2005 to 2014.

Ultrasound-Assisted Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Submassive Pulmonary Embolism.

PURPOSE: Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) is a relatively new therapy for pulmonary embolism that achieves the superior clot resolution compared to systemic thrombolysis while avoiding the high bleeding risk intrinsically associated with that therapy. In order to examine the efficacy and safety of CDT, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing ultrasound-assisted CDT at our institution. METHODS: The charts of 30 consecutive patients who underwent CDT as a treatment of pulmonary embolism at our institution were reviewed. Risk factors for bleeding during thrombolysis were noted. Indicators of the right heart strain on computed tomography and echocardiogram, as well as the degree of pulmonary vascular obstruction, were recorded before and after CDT. Thirty-day mortality and occurrence of bleeding events were recorded. RESULTS: Nine (30%) patients had 3 or more minor contraindications to thrombolysis and 14 (47%) had major surgery in the month prior to CDT. Right ventricular systolic pressure and vascular obstruction decreased significantly after CDT. There was a significant decrease in the proportion of patients with right ventricular dilation or hypokinesis. Decrease in pulmonary vascular obstruction was associated with nadir of fibrinogen level. No patients experienced major or moderate bleeding attributed to CDT. CONCLUSION: Catheter-directed thrombolysis is an effective therapy in rapidly alleviating the right heart strain that is associated with increased mortality and long-term morbidity in patients with pulmonary embolism with minimal bleeding risk. Catheter-directed thrombolysis is a safe alternative to systemic thrombolysis in patients with risk factors for bleeding such as prior surgery. Future studies should examine the safety of CDT in patients with contraindications to systemic thrombolysis.

Comparative Outcomes of Ultrasound-Assisted Thrombolysis and Standard Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in the Treatment of Acute Pulmonary Embolism.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing ultrasound-accelerated thrombolysis (USAT) and standard catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: The records of all patients in our institution having undergone CDT or USAT for massive or submassive PE from 2009 to 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Standard statistical methods were used to compare characteristics and to assess for longitudinal change in outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients, 27 CDT and 36 USAT, were treated for massive (12.7%) or submassive (87.3%) PE. Of which, 96.8% were treated for bilateral PE. Baseline patient characteristics did not differ between the 2 treatment groups. There was no difference in total dose of lytic administered (CDT: 23.2 ± 13.7 mg; USAT: 27.5 ± 12.9 mg; P = .2). Two patients in the CDT and 1 in the USAT groups required conversion to surgical thrombectomy (CDT: 7.4%; USAT: 2.8%; P = .6). Rates of major and minor bleeding complications (CDT: 11.0%; USAT: 13.9%; P = .8) did not differ significantly between the CDT and USAT groups. Estimated survival at 90 days was 92% for CDT and 93% for USAT and 82% at 1 year for both groups (P = .8). All echocardiographic parameters improved significantly from baseline to 1-year follow-up, but quantitative improvement did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: This study suggests no statistical differences in clinical and hemodynamic outcomes or procedural complication rates between USAT and standard CDT for the treatment of acute PE. Prospective studies are needed to further evaluate comparative and cost-effectiveness of different interventions for acute massive and submassive PE.

Hemodynamic Predictors of Heart Failure Morbidity and Mortality: Fluid or Flow?

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced heart failure may continue for prolonged times with persistent hemodynamic abnormalities; intermediate- and long-term outcomes of these patients are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used ESCAPE (Evaluation Study of Congestive Heart Failure and Pulmonary Artery Catheterization Effectiveness) trial data to examine characteristics and outcomes of patients with invasive hemodynamic monitoring during an acute heart failure hospitalization. Patients were stratified by final measurement of cardiac index (CI; L/min/m2) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP; mmHg) before catheter removal. The study groups were CI ≥ 2/PCWP < 20 (n = 74), CI ≥ 2/PCWP ≥ 20 (n = 37), CI < 2/PCWP < 20 (n = 23), and CI < 2/PCWP ≥ 20 (n = 17). Final CI was not associated with the combined risk of death, cardiovascular hospitalization, and transplantation (hazard ratio [HR]1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.96-1.11 per 0.2 L/min/m2 decrease, P = .39), but final PCWP ≥ 20 mmHg was associated with increased risk of these events (HR 2.03, 95% confidence interval 1.31-3.15, P < .01), as was higher final right atrial pressure (HR 1.09, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.12 per mmHg increase, P < .01). CONCLUSION: Final PCWP and final right atrial pressure were stronger predictors of postdischarge outcomes than CI in patients with advanced heart failure. The ability to lower filling pressures appears to be more prognostically important than improving CI in the management of patients with advanced heart failure. ClinicalTrials.govIdentifier: NCT00000619.

Utilization of catheter-directed thrombolysis in pulmonary embolism and outcome difference between systemic thrombolysis and catheter-directed thrombolysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the utilization of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and its comparative effectiveness against systemic thrombolysis in acute pulmonary embolism (PE). BACKGROUND: Contemporary real world data regarding utilization and outcomes comparing systemic thrombolysis with CDT for PE is sparse. METHODS: We queried the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2012 using the ICD-9-CM diagnosis code 415.11, 415.13, and 415.19 for acute PE. We used propensity score analysis to compare outcomes between systemic thrombolysis and CDT. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome was combined in-hospital mortality and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). RESULTS: Out of 110,731 patients hospitalized with PE, we identified 1,521 patients treated with thrombolysis, of which 1,169 patients received systemic thrombolysis and 352 patients received CDT. After propensity-matched comparison, primary and secondary outcomes were significantly lower in the CDT group compared to systemic thrombolysis (21.81% vs. 13.36%, OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36-0.85, P value = 0.007) and (22.89% vs. 13.36%, OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34-0.80, P value = 0.003), respectively. The median length of stay [7 days, interquartile range (IQR) (5-9 days) vs. 7 days, IQR (5-10 days), P = 0.17] was not significant between the two groups. The CDT group had higher cost of hospitalization [$17,218, IQR ($12,272-$23,906) vs. $23,799, IQR ($17,892-$35,338), P < 0.001]. Multivariate analysis identified increasing age, saddle PE, cardiopulmonary arrest, and Medicaid insurance as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: CDT was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and combined in-hospital mortality and ICH.

Questionable benefit of the pulmonary artery catheter after cardiac surgery in high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of pulmonary artery catheterization on clinical outcomes after cardiac surgery in higher-risk patients. DESIGN: Retrospective national database analysis. SETTING: U.S. hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: A weighted sample of 2,063,337 patients undergoing cardiac surgery identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010. INTERVENTIONS: Pulmonary artery catheterization. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Compared to patients who did not receive a pulmonary artery catheter, those who did on the whole were on average slightly older (66.6±11.9 years v 65.5±12.8 years, p<0.001), more likely to have pulmonary hypertension (7.5% v 5.1%, p<0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (24.6% v 20.7%, p<0.001), obesity (15.0% v 13.1%, p<0.001), and chronic renal failure (10.9% v 9.2%, p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, the risk of operative mortality in patients who underwent pulmonary artery catheterization was significantly higher than in those who did not (4.6% v 3.1%, p<0.001), adjusted OR 1.34 (95% CI 1.26-1.43, p<0.001). In propensity matched subgroup analysis operative mortality risk was higher in octogenarian patients (OR 1.24, p = 0.24), and patients with congestive heart failure (OR 1.39, p = 0.023) who underwent pulmonary artery catheterization. No significant difference in operative mortality was observed in low-risk patients according to whether or not they underwent pulmonary artery catheterization. The incidence of prolonged mechanical ventilation and length of stay>30 days was higher in patients who underwent pulmonary artery catheterization in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary practice pulmonary artery catheters do not appear to be associated with reductions in operative mortality or morbidity and are associated with increases in duration of ventilation and length of stay in the intensive care unit.

Increasing use of less-invasive hemodynamic monitoring in 3 specialty surgical intensive care units: a 5-year experience at a tertiary medical center.

INTRODUCTION: Less-invasive hemodynamic monitoring (eg, esophageal doppler monitoring [EDM] and arterial pressure contour analysis, FloTrac) is increasingly used as an alternative to pulmonary artery catheters (PACs) in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU). HYPOTHESIS: The decrease in use of PACs is not associated with increased mortality. METHODS: Five-year retrospective review of 1894 hemodynamically monitored patients admitted to 3 surgical ICUs in a university-affiliate, tertiary care urban hospital. Data included the number of admissions, diagnosis-related group discharge case mix, length of stay, insertion of monitoring devices (PAC, EDM, and FloTrac probes), administered intravenous vasoactive agents (ß-predominant agonists--dobutamine, epinephrine, and dopamine; vasopressors--norepinephrine and phenylephrine), and mortality. Data from hospital administrative databases were compiled to create patient characteristic and monitoring variables across a 5-year time period, 2005 to 2009 inclusive. Chi-square for independent proportions, 1-way analysis of variance, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used; tests for trend were conducted. An α level of .05 was considered significant. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences v14 was used for all statistical testing. RESULTS: There was a significant change in the type of hemodynamic monitors inserted in 2 of the 3 surgical ICUs (in the general surgery and neurointensive care but not in the cardiac ICU) from PACs to less-invasive devices (FloTrac or EDM) during the 5-year study period (P < .001). There was no change in mortality rate over the time period (P = .492). There was an overall increase in the proportion of monitored patients who received intravenous vasoactive agents (P < .001) with a progressive shift from ß-agonists to vasopressors (P < .002). Multivariate analyses indicated that age, case mix, and use of vasoactive agents were all independent predictors of inhospital mortality (P = .001) but that type of monitoring was not (P = .638). CONCLUSIONS: In a 5-year period, the decreased insertions of PACs were replaced by increased utilization of less-invasive hemodynamic monitoring devices. This change in practice did not adversely impact mortality.

Pulmonary artery catheter.

Since its inception, the pulmonary artery catheter has enjoyed widespread use in both medical and surgical critically ill patients. It has also endured criticism and skepticism about its benefit in these patient populations. By providing information such as cardiac output, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and intracardiac pressures, the pulmonary artery catheter may improve care of the most complex critically ill patients in the intensive care unit and the operating room. With its ability to transduce pressures through multiple ports, one of the primary clinical uses for pulmonary artery catheters is real-time intracardiac pressure monitoring. Correct interpretation of the waveforms is essential to confirming correct placement of the catheter to ensure accurate data are recorded. Major complications related to catheter placement are infrequent, but misinterpretation of monitored data is not uncommon and has led many to question the utility of the pulmonary artery catheter. The evidence to date suggests that the use of the catheter does not change mortality in many critically ill patients and may expose these patients to a higher rate of complications. However, additional clinical trials are needed, particularly in the most complex critically ill patients, who have generally been excluded from many of the research trials performed to date.

Impact of pulmonary artery catheter on outcome in patients with acute heart failure syndromes with hypotension or receiving inotropes: from the ATTEND Registry.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials concerning pulmonary artery catheters (PACs) use have yielded little evidence of their beneficial effects on survival. This study aimed to evaluate the association between PACs and in-hospital mortality in patients with acute heart failure syndromes (AHFS). METHODS: The Acute Decompensated Heart Failure Syndromes (ATTEND) Registry is a prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study performed in Japan, since April 2007. We analyzed data from the ATTEND Registry and evaluated the effectiveness of PAC in AHFS treatment using propensity score-matching and the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Final follow-up examinations of the 4842 patients were conducted in December 2012. During the study period, 813 patients (16.8%) were managed with PACs, of which 502 patients (PAC group) were propensity score-matched with 502 controls (Control group). Of the 1004 score-matched patients, 22 (4.4%) patients from the Control group and 7 (1.4%) from the PAC group died. The risk of all-cause death was lower in the PAC group than that in the Control group [hazard ratio (HR), 0.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.13-0.70; p=0.006]. PAC-guided therapy decreased all-cause mortality in patients with lower systolic blood pressure (SBP ≤ 100 mm Hg; HR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.70; p=0.021) or inotropic therapy (HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08-0.57; p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that appropriate PAC use effectively decreases in-hospital mortality in AHFS patients, particularly those with lower SBP or receiving inotropic therapy, suggesting that real-world PAC use could improve AHFS management.

Echocardiography in the use of noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring.

Invasive pulmonary artery catheter measurements are the standard method for assessment of hemodynamic evaluation at the present time. However, this invasive approach is associated with an increase in patient morbidity and without evidence of a reduction in mortality. Doppler echocardiography is a noninvasive method that provides robust data regarding patients' hemodynamic indices. Several parameters are available for noninvasive hemodynamic evaluation using Doppler echocardiography. Most of these measurements are easily obtained and provide a safe alternative to invasive hemodynamic assessment. As Doppler echocardiography is able to provide additional valuable information, such as cardiac systolic and diastolic function, and the presence of pericardial and pleural effusions, which can play a significant role in the patients' hemodynamic status, using this noninvasive modality in the daily practice for hemodynamic assessment can prove an alternative to invasive measures in selected patients as well as a complementary tool for those still in need of invasive monitoring.

Pulmonary artery catheters for adult patients in intensive care.

BACKGROUND: Since pulmonary artery balloon flotation catheterization was first introduced in 1970, by HJ Swan and W Ganz, it has been widely disseminated as a diagnostic tool without rigorous evaluation of its clinical utility and effectiveness in critically ill patients. A pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) is inserted through a central venous access into the right side of the heart and floated into the pulmonary artery. PAC is used to measure stroke volume, cardiac output, mixed venous oxygen saturation and intracardiac pressures with a variety of additional calculated variables to guide diagnosis and treatment. Complications of the procedure are mainly related to line insertion. Relatively uncommon complications include cardiac arrhythmias, pulmonary haemorrhage and infarct, and associated mortality from balloon tip rupture. OBJECTIVES: To provide an up-to-date assessment of the effectiveness of a PAC on mortality, length of stay (LOS) in intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital and cost of care in adult intensive care patients. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 12); MEDLINE (1954 to January 2012); EMBASE (1980 to January 2012); CINAHL (1982 to January 2012), and reference lists of articles. We contacted researchers in the field. We did a grey literature search for articles published until January 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials conducted in adults ICUs, comparing management with and without a PAC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We screened the titles and abstracts and then the full text reports identified from our electronic search. Two authors (SR and MG) independently reviewed the titles, abstracts and then the full text reports for inclusion. We determined the final list of included studies by discussion among the group members (SR, ND, MG, AK and SC) with consensus agreement. We included all the studies that were in the original review. We assessed seven domains of potential risk of bias for the included studies. We examined the clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity and used random-effects model for meta-analysis. We calculated risk ratio for mortality across studies and mean days for LOS. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 studies (5686 patients). We judged blinding of participants and personnel and blinding of outcome assessment to be at high risk in about 50% of the included studies and at low risk in 25% to 30% of the studies. Regardless of the high risk of performance bias these studies were included based on the low weight the studies had in the meta-analysis. We rated 75% of the studies as low risk for selection, attrition and reporting bias. All 13 studies reported some type of hospital mortality (28-day, 30-day, 60-day or ICU mortality). We considered studies of high-risk surgery patients (eight studies) and general intensive care patients (five studies) separately as subgroups for meta-analysis. The pooled risk ratio (RR) for mortality for the studies of general intensive care patients was 1.02 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.09) and for the studies of high-risk surgery patients the RR was 0.98 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.29). Of the eight studies of high-risk surgery patients, five evaluated the effectiveness of pre-operative optimization but there was no difference in mortality when these studies were examined separately. PAC did not affect general ICU LOS (reported by four studies) or hospital LOS (reported by nine studies). Four studies, conducted in the United States (US), reported costs based on hospital charges billed, which on average were higher in the PAC groups. Two of these studies qualified for analysis and did not show a statistically significant hospital cost difference (mean difference USD 900, 95% CI -2620 to 4420, P = 0.62). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PAC is a diagnostic and haemodynamic monitoring tool but not a therapeutic intervention. Our review concluded that use of a PAC did not alter the mortality, general ICU or hospital LOS, or cost for adult patients in intensive care. The quality of evidence was high for mortality and LOS but low for cost analysis. Efficacy studies are needed to determine if there are optimal PAC-guided management protocols, which when applied to specific patient groups in ICUs could result in benefits such as shock reversal, improved organ function and less vasopressor use. Newer, less-invasive haemodynamic monitoring tools need to be validated against PAC prior to clinical use in critically ill patients.

Using clinical databases to evaluate healthcare interventions.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of conducting rigorous, nonrandomized studies (NRSs) of healthcare interventions using existing clinical databases in terms of the following: recruiting a large representative sample of hospitals, identifying eligible cases, matching cases to controls to achieve similar baseline characteristics, making meaningful comparisons of outcomes, and carrying out subgroup analyses. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre's Case Mix Programme Database to investigate the impact of management with a pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Participating ICUs were invited to collect additional data for the analysis. Patients managed with a PAC were matched to control patients on their propensity score. Hospital mortality was then compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Of 117 eligible ICUs, 68 (58 percent) agreed to participate, of which 57 (84 percent) collected additional data. Although a slightly higher proportion of larger ICUs in university hospitals participated, the patient case-mix was similar to that in nonparticipating ICUs. Almost all patients managed with a PAC (98 percent) were successfully matched to patients managed without a PAC. The two groups were similar for baseline characteristics. However, hospital mortality was worse for PAC patients than for non-PAC patients (odds ratio, 1.28; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.06-1.55). Subgroup analysis suggested that the impact of management with a PAC was modified by severity of illness. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous NRSs are feasible if they are based on data from high-quality clinical databases. However, the reliability of estimated treatment effects from such studies requires further investigation.

Catheter-directed therapy for the treatment of massive pulmonary embolism: systematic review and meta-analysis of modern techniques.

PURPOSE: Systemic thrombolysis for the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) carries an estimated 20% risk of major hemorrhage, including a 3%-5% risk of hemorrhagic stroke. The authors used evidence-based methods to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of modern catheter-directed therapy (CDT) as an alternative treatment for massive PE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review was initiated by electronic literature searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE) for studies published from January 1990 through September 2008. Inclusion criteria were applied to select patients with acute massive PE treated with modern CDT. Modern techniques were defined as the use of low-profile devices (< or =10 F), mechanical fragmentation and/or aspiration of emboli including rheolytic thrombectomy, and intraclot thrombolytic injection if a local drug was infused. Relevant non-English language articles were translated into English. Paired reviewers assessed study quality and abstracted data. Meta-analysis was performed by using random effects models to calculate pooled estimates for complications and clinical success rates across studies. Clinical success was defined as stabilization of hemodynamics, resolution of hypoxia, and survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: Five hundred ninety-four patients from 35 studies (six prospective, 29 retrospective) met the criteria for inclusion. The pooled clinical success rate from CDT was 86.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 82.1%, 90.2%). Pooled risks of minor and major procedural complications were 7.9% (95% CI: 5.0%, 11.3%) and 2.4% (95% CI: 1.9%, 4.3%), respectively. Data on the use of systemic thrombolysis before CDT were available in 571 patients; 546 of those patients (95%) were treated with CDT as the first adjunct to heparin without previous intravenous thrombolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Modern CDT is a relatively safe and effective treatment for acute massive PE. At experienced centers, CDT should be considered as a first-line treatment for patients with massive PE.

Changing preferences for survival after hospitalization with advanced heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to analyze how patient preferences for survival versus quality-of-life change after hospitalization with advanced heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND: Although patient-centered care is a priority, little is known about preferences to trade length of life for quality among hospitalized patients with advanced HF, and it is not known how those preferences change after hospitalization. METHODS: The time trade-off utility, symptom scores, and 6-min walk distance were measured in 287 patients in the ESCAPE (Evaluation Study of Congestive Heart Failure and Pulmonary Artery Catheter Effectiveness) trial at hospitalization and again during 6 months after therapy to relieve congestion. RESULTS: Willingness to trade was bimodal. At baseline, the median trade for better quality was 3 months' survival time, with a modest relation to symptom severity. Preference for survival time was stable for most patients, but increase after discharge occurred in 98 of 145 (68%) patients initially willing to trade survival time, and was more common with symptom improvement and after therapy guided by pulmonary artery catheters (p = 0.034). Adjusting days alive after hospital discharge for patients' survival preference reduced overall days by 24%, with the largest reduction among patients dying early after discharge (p = 0.0015). CONCLUSIONS: Preferences remain in favor of survival for many patients despite advanced HF symptoms, but increase further after hospitalization. The bimodal distribution and the stability of patient preference limit utility as a trial end point, but support its relevance in design of care for an individual patient.

[Serious mechanical complications associated with pulmonary artery catheters in cardiovascular and thoracic surgery]. / Complicaciones graves de tipo mecánico asociadas al catéter de arteria pulmonar en cirugía cardiovascular y torácica.

OBJECTIVE: Although the use of pulmonary artery catheters (PACs) in managing critical patients is a subject of debate, they continue to be inserted in many cases and possible complications should be taken into account. Our objective was to review the serious or potentially serious complications associated with PACs in our hospital in the past 15 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of seious mechanical complications of PAC use in patients who underwent vascular, cardiac, and thoracic surgery. RESULTS: The study included the records 7540 patients; 9 cases of serious complications were detected. These complications included 5 cases of pulmonary artery rupture (3 of which resulted in death), 1 perforated internal mammary vein, 1 knotted catheter, 1 bent one, and 1 case of a PAC becoming trapped in the surgical suture. CONCLUSIONS: The 0.12% incidence of complications is lower than rates found in the literature. Although these complications are rare, it is necessary to take precautions against their unexcepted appearance by carefully selecting the patients in whom PACs are placed and by paying special attention to the characteristic clinical and radiological signs of complications.

Pulmonary artery catheters for adult patients in intensive care.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary artery catheterization was adopted about 30 years ago and widely disseminated without rigorous evaluation as to whether it benefited critically ill patients. The technique is used to measure cardiac output and pressures in the pulmonary circulation to guide diagnosis and treatment. Clinicians believe these data can improve patients' outcomes, even in the absence of consensus about the specific interpretation of the data. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of pulmonary artery catheterization on mortality and cost of care in adult intensive care patients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2006); MEDLINE (all records to April 2006); EMBASE (all records to April 2006); CINAHL (all records to April 2006) and reference lists of articles. We contacted manufacturers and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials in adults, comparing management with and without a pulmonary artery catheter (PAC). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We screened the titles and abstracts of the electronic search results and obtained the full text of studies of possible relevance for independent review. We determined the final results of the literature search by consensus between the authors. We did not contact study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 12 studies. Mortality was reported as hospital, 28-day, 30-day, or intensive care unit. We considered studies of high-risk surgery patients (eight studies) and general intensive care patients (four studies) separately for the meta-analysis. The pooled odds ratio for the studies of general intensive care patients was 1.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.26) and for the studies of high-risk surgery patients 0.99 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.24). Of the eight studies of high-risk surgery patients, five evaluated the effectiveness of pre-operative optimization but there was no difference in mortality when these studies were examined separately. Pulmonary artery catheterization did not affect intensive care unit (reported by 10 studies) or hospital (reported by nine studies) length of stay. Four studies, conducted in the United States, measured costs based on hospital charges billed to patients, which on average were higher in the PAC groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: To date, there have been two multi-centre trials of the effectiveness of PACs for managing critically ill patients admitted to intensive care, although only one was adequately powered. Efficacy studies are needed to determine optimal management protocols and patient groups who could benefit from management with a PAC.