Multidisciplinary Approach to Pulmonary Embolism and the Role of the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a leading cause of cardiovascular death and morbidity, and presents a major burden to healthcare systems. The field has seen rapid growth with development of innovative clot reduction technologies, as well as ongoing multicenter trials that may completely revolutionize care of PE patients. However, current paucity of robust clinical trials and guidelines often leave individual physicians managing patients with acute PE in a dilemma. RECENT FINDINGS: The pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) was developed as a platform to rapidly engage multiple specialists to deliver evidence-based, organized and efficient care and help address some of the gaps in knowledge. Several centers investigating outcomes following implementation of PERT have demonstrated shorter hospital and intensive-care unit stays, lower use of inferior vena cava filters, and in some instances improved mortality. Since the advent of PERT, early findings demonstrate promise with improved outcomes after implementation of PERT. Incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) into PERT has also shown promise with more streamlined care and reducing response times. Further clinical trials are needed to examine the impact of PERT model on care delivery and clinical outcomes.

Outcome of Pulmonary Embolism with and without Ischemic Stroke.

Background: Ischemic stroke is the second, and pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most common cardiovascular cause of death after myocardial infarction. Data regarding risk factors for ischemic stroke in patients with acute PE are limited. Methods: Patients were selected by screening the German nationwide in-patient sample for PE (ICD-code I26) and were stratified by ischemic stroke (ICD code I63) and compared. Results: The nationwide in-patient sample comprised 346,586 hospitalized PE patients (53.3% females) in Germany from 2011 to 2014; among these, 6704 (1.9%) patients had additionally an ischemic stroke. PE patients with ischemic stroke had a higher in-hospital mortality rate than those without (28.9% vs. 14.5%, p < 0.001). Ischemic stroke was independently associated with in-hospital death (OR 2.424, 95%CI 2.278-2.579, p < 0.001). Deep venous thrombosis and/or thrombophlebitis (DVT) combined with heart septal defect (OR 24.714 [95%CI 20.693-29.517], p < 0.001) as well as atrial fibrillation/flutter (OR 2.060 [95%CI 1.943-2.183], p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for stroke in PE patients. Systemic thrombolysis was associated with a better survival in PE patients with ischemic thrombolysis who underwent cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR, OR 0.55 [95%CI 0.36-0.84], p = 0.006). Conclusions: Ischemic stroke did negatively affect the survival of PE. Combination of DVT and heart septal defect and atrial fibrillation/flutter were strong and independent risk factors for ischemic stroke in PE patients. In PE patients with ischemic stroke, who had to underwent CPR, systemic thrombolysis was associated with improved survival.

Pulmonary embolism with paradoxical embolization to right coronary artery in the presence of a large patent foramen ovale: a case report.

Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the leading cause of in-hospital death and the third most frequent cause of cardiovascular death. The clinical presentation of PE is variable, and choosing the appropriate treatment for individual patients can be challenging. Case summary: A 64-year-old man presented to hospital with acute chest pain, shortness of breath, and pulmonary oedema. Electrocardiogram revealed ST-elevation myocardial infarction. D-dimer was 18.8 mg/L fibrinogen equivalent units (FEU) (normal <0.64), and troponin was 25 (normal 5-14 ng/L). After systemic thrombolysis, respiratory failure persisted, and the arterial blood gas showed PaO2 of 6.0 kPa (normal 10.5-13.5 kPa), with 100% oxygen delivery via high-flow nasal cannula. A computed tomography diagnosed bilateral lobar PE, and coronary angiogram showed multiple thrombus in the right coronary artery. A bubble study with thoracic echocardiogram revealed a large right-left inter-atrial shunt. The patient denied treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and surgical thrombectomy. With no access to percutaneous catheter-directed thrombectomy, the patient received three separate thrombolysis treatments followed by a continued infusion for 22 h. After 6 weeks in hospital, the patient was discharged to rehab. Discussion: For a long time, PE has been largely seen as a medical disease. Intra-cardiac shunts such as patent foramen ovale can complicate thrombo-venous disease and introduce paradoxical shunts leading to arterial emboli and persistent hypoxaemia. Over recent years, modern percutaneous catheter-directed thrombectomy has been developed for both high-risk and intermediate to high-risk PEs. Thrombectomy might improve right ventricular function and haemodynamics, but there is lacking evidence from randomized trials on efficacy, safety, and long-term outcome.

In-hospital mortality of high-risk pulmonary embolism: a nationwide population-based cohort study in Portugal from 2010 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: The mortality associated with high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is remarkably high, and reperfusion to unload right ventricle should be a priority. However, several registries report reperfusion underuse. In Portugal, epidemiological data about the incidence, rate of reperfusion and mortality of high-risk PE are not known. METHODS: Nationwide population-based temporal trend study in the incidence and outcome of high-risk PE, who were admitted to hospitals of the National Health Service in Portugal between 2010 and 2018. High-risk PE was defined as patients with PE who developed cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest. International Classification of Diseases (ICD), 9th and 10th revision, Clinical Modification codes, were used for data from the period between 2010 and 2016 (ICD-9-CM) and 2017-2018 (ICD-10-CM), respectively. The assessment focused on trends in the use of reperfusion treatment, which was defined by application of thrombolysis or pulmonary embolectomy. A comparison was made between the use or non-use of reperfusion therapy in order to examine trends in in-hospital mortality among high-risk PE cases. RESULTS: From 2010 and 2018, there were 40.311 hospitalization episodes for PE in adult patients at hospitals of the National Health Service in mainland Portugal. There was a significant increase in the annual incidence of PE (41/100.000 inhabitants in 2010 to 46/100.000 in 2018; R2=0.582, p = 0.010). The average annual incidence was 45/100.000 inhabitants/year, with 2,7% of the PE episodes (1104) categorized as high-risk. The mortality rate associated with high-risk PE was high, although it has decreased over the years (74.2% in 2010 to 63.6% in 2018; R2=0.484; p = 0.022). Thrombolytic therapy was underused in high-risk PE, and its usage has not increased in recent years (17.3% in 2010 to 21.1% in 2018, R2=-0.127; p = 0.763). Surgical pulmonary embolectomy was used in 0.27% of cases, and there was no registry of catheter-directed thrombolysis. Patients with high-risk PE undergoing reperfusion therapy had lower in-hospital mortality compared to non-reperfused patients (OR=0.52; IC95% 0.38-0.70). CONCLUSION: In Portugal, between 2010 and 2018, very few patients with PE developed high-risk forms of the disease, but the mortality rate among those patients was high. The low reperfusion rate could be associated with high in-hospital mortality and highlights the need to implement advanced therapies, as an alternative to systemic thrombolysis.

Adding Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation to Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Due to Pulmonary Embolism: A Case Report.

We present a challenging cardiopulmonary resuscitation scenario of an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in a 21-year-old healthy woman recovering from a lower limb fracture who collapsed during a rehabilitation session at a community center. The combination of witnessed arrest, administration of immediate cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and effective communication to emergency services enabled a timely cannulation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in a cardiopulmonary resuscitation reference center. The cause of the cardiac arrest was pulmonary embolism, and the intensive care unit team opted for thrombolysis when she arrived after 40 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The circulatory support given by venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation enabled adequate perfusion until the restoration of cardiac blood flow at 75 minutes after cardiac arrest. Despite the initial success, several life-threatening complications occurred. Anticoagulation is of paramount importance during extracorporeal support, as is thrombolysis in massive pulmonary embolism with cardiac arrest. However, this led to several complications. We highlight the importance of liaising with a wider team in such cases, including hepatobiliary surgery, vascular surgery, and interventional radiology, as doing so saved this patient's life without deficits.

Contemporary Management and Outcomes of Patients With High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary care patterns/outcomes in high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) patients are unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to characterize the management of high-risk PE patients and identify factors associated with poor outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the PERT (Pulmonary Embolism Response Team) Consortium Registry was performed. Patients presenting with intermediate-risk PE, high-risk PE, and catastrophic PE (those with hemodynamic collapse) were identified. Patient characteristics were compared with chi-square testing for categorical covariates and Student's t-test for continuous covariates. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess associations between clinical characteristics and outcomes in the high-risk population. RESULTS: Of 5,790 registry patients, 2,976 presented with intermediate-risk PE and 1,442 with high-risk PE. High-risk PE patients were more frequently treated with advanced therapies than intermediate-risk PE patients (41.9% vs 30.2%; P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality (20.6% vs 3.7%; P < 0.001) and major bleeding (10.5% vs. 3.5%; P < 0.001) were more common in high-risk PE. Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated vasopressor use (OR: 4.56; 95% CI: 3.27-6.38; P < 0.01), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use (OR: 2.86; 95% CI: 1.12-7.30; P = 0.03), identified clot-in-transit (OR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.13-4.52; P = 0.02), and malignancy (OR: = 1.70; 95% CI: 1.13-2.56; P = 0.01) as factors associated with in-hospital mortality. Catastrophic PE patients (n = 197 [13.7% of high-risk PE patients]) had higher in-hospital mortality (42.1% vs 17.2%; P < 0.001) than those presenting with noncatastrophic high-risk PE. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (13.3% vs. 4.8% P < 0.001) and systemic thrombolysis (25% vs 11.3%; P < 0.001) were used more commonly in catastrophic PE. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest analysis of high-risk PE patients to date, mortality rates were high with the worst outcomes among patients with hemodynamic collapse.

Trends and outcomes of lytic-based therapies for high-risk pulmonary embolism: A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Systemic thrombolysis (ST) is the guideline-recommended treatment for high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE), although catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) may provide a treatment alternative associated with lower rates of bleeding. Furthermore, the treatment trends and outcomes among those with high-risk PE according to treatment assignments of no lytic therapy (NLT), ST, and CDT are underreported. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for high-risk PE between 2016 and 2019 were identified by administrative claims codes from the National Readmission Database. Therapy assignment was similarly defined by administrative codes, then stratified into NLT, ST, and CDT cohorts to report patient characteristics, care settings, and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality with rates adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics using multivariable logistic regression. Secondary outcomes included intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), and 90-day readmission. Over the years of interest, trends in lytic treatment along with concomitant use of mechanical or surgical thrombectomy were reported. RESULTS: Among 74,516 patients with high-risk PE, 61,569 (82.6%) received NLT, 8445 (11.3%) received ST, and 4502 (6.04%) received CDT. The NLT subgroup, relative to ST and CDT, tended to be older (66.1 ± 15.4, 62.8 ± 15.3, and 63.4 ± 14.4; p < 0.001) and more frequently women (56.0%, 54.4%, and 51.3%; p < 0.001), respectively. The unadjusted in-hospital mortality rate was highest for ST (18.8%, 34.1%, and 18.3% for NLT, ST, and CDT, respectively; p < 0.001) and persisted after multivariable adjustment (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.43; 95% CI 0.38-0.49; p < 0.0001) of in-hospital mortality for CDT relative to ST. The unadjusted rate of ICH or GIB was lowest for NLT (1.0%, 2.0%, and 0.6% for NLT, ST, and CDT, respectively; p < 0.001). CDT, relative to ST, was associated with reduced odds of ICH (aOR 0.32; 95% CI 0.18-0.55; p < 0.0001) and GIB (aOR 0.78; 95% CI 0.62-0.98; p < 0.0001). Readmissions were highest for NLT (21.7%, 9.6%, and 12.1% for NLT, ST, and CDT, respectively; p < 0.001). CDT was associated with a higher incidence of 90-day readmission relative to ST (aOR 1.32; 95% CI 1.10-1.57; p < 0.001). From 2016 to 2019, individual treatment trends were not significantly different, although NLT tended to be offered among smaller and rural hospitals. Rates of concomitant thrombectomy were low in all three treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among a large, contemporary, US cohort with high-risk PE, over 80% of patients did not receive any form of thrombolysis. High-risk PE that did receive systemic thrombolysis was associated with the highest rates of in-hospital mortality, suggesting opportunities to study the implementation of lytic and nonlytic-based treatments to improve outcomes for those presenting with high-risk PE.

Underuse of reperfusion therapy with systemic thrombolysis in high-risk acute pulmonary embolism in a Portuguese center.

INTRODUCTION: Reperfusion therapy is generally recommended in acute high-risk pulmonary embolism (HR-PE), but several population-based studies report that it is underused. Data on epidemiology, management and outcomes of HR-PE in Portugal are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To determine the reperfusion rate in HR-PE patients, the reasons for non-reperfusion, and how it influences outcomes. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study of consecutive HR-PE patients admitted to a thromboembolic disease referral center between 2008 and 2018, independent predictors for non-reperfusion were assessed by multivariate logistic regression. PE-related mortality and long-term MACE (cardiovascular mortality, PE recurrence and chronic thromboembolic disease) were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences stratified by reperfusion were assessed using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Of 1955 acute PE patients, 3.8% presented with hemodynamic instability. The overall reperfusion rate was 50%: 35 patients underwent systemic thrombolysis, one received first-line percutaneous embolectomy and one rescue endovascular treatment. Independent predictors of non-reperfusion were: age, with >75 years representing 12 times the risk of non-treatment (OR 11.9, 95% CI 2.7-52.3, p=0.001); absolute contraindication for thrombolysis (31.1%), with recent major surgery and central nervous system disease as the most common reasons (OR 16.7, 95% CI 3.2-87.0, p<0.001); and being hospitalized (OR 7.7, 95% CI 1.4-42.9, p=0.020). At a mean follow-up of 2.5±3.3 years, the survival rate was 33.8%. Although not reaching statistical significance for hospital mortality, mortality in the reperfusion group was significantly lower at 30 days, 12 months and during follow-up (relative risk reduction of death of 64% at 12 months, p=0.013). Similar results were found for MACE. CONCLUSIONS: In this population, the recommended reperfusion therapy was performed in only 50% of patients, with advanced age and absolute contraindications to fibrinolysis being the main predictors of non-reperfusion. In this study, thrombolysis underuse was associated with a significant increase in short- and long-term mortality and events.

A multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team (PERT): first experience from a single center in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Over the last few years, the concept of multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) has emerged to encounter the increasing variety and complexity in managing acute pulmonary embolism (PE). PURPOSE: To investigate PERT's composition and added clinical value in a university center in Germany. METHODS: Over 4 years (01/2019-11/2022), patients with confirmed PE were enrolled in a prospective single-center cohort study (PERT Mainz). We investigated the composition of PERT and compared, after propensity score matching, patients with acute PE before and after the initiation of PERT at our Medical University Centre. The primary outcome was in-hospital PE-related mortality. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2022, 88 patients with acute PE with a PERT decision were registered. Of those, 13 (14.8%) patients died during the in-hospital stay. Patients evaluated by a PERT had a median age of 68; 48.9% were females, and 21.7% suffered from malignancy. Right ventricular dysfunction was present in 76.1% of all patients. In total, 42.0% were classified as intermediate-high-risk PE and 11.4% as high-risk PE. First PERT contact mainly originated from emergency departments (33.3%) and intensive care units (30.0%), followed by chest pain units (21.3%) and regular wards (12.0%). The participation rate of medical specialties demonstrated that cardiologists (100%) or cardiac/vascular surgeons (98.6%) were included in almost all PERT consultations, followed by radiologists (95.9%) and anesthesiologists (87.8%). Compared to the PERT era, more patients in the pre-PERT era were classified as simplified pulmonary embolism severity index (sPESI) ≥ 1 (78.4% vs 71.6%) and as high-risk PE according to ESC 2019 guidelines (18.2% vs. 11.4%). In the pre-PERT era, low- and intermediate-low patients with PE received more frequently advanced reperfusion therapies such as systemic thrombolysis or surgical embolectomy compared to the PERT era (10.7% vs. 2.5%). Patients in the pre-PERT were found to have a considerably higher all-cause mortality and PE-related mortality rate (31.8% vs. 14.8%) compared to patients in the PERT era (22.7% vs. 13.6%). After propensity matching (1:1) by including parameters as age, sex, sPESI, and ESC risk classes, univariate regression analyses demonstrated that the PE management based on a PERT decision was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (OR, 0.37 [95%CI 0.18-0.77]; p = 0.009). For PE-related mortality, a tendency for reduction was observed (OR, 0.54 [95%CI 0.24-1.18]; p = 0.121). CONCLUSION: PERT implementation was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality rate in patients with acute PE. Large prospective studies are needed further to explore the impact of PERTs on clinical outcomes.

Addressing the rising trend of high-risk pulmonary embolism mortality: Clinical and research priorities.

BACKGROUND: Deaths from high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) appear to have increased in the US over the last decade. Modifiable risks contributing to this worrisome trend present opportunities for physicians, researchers, and healthcare policymakers to improve care. METHODS: We sought to contextualize contemporary, high-risk PE epidemiology and examine clinical trials, quality improvement opportunities, and healthcare policy initiatives directed at reducing mortality. RESULTS: We observed significant and modifiable excess mortality due to high-risk PE. We identified several opportunities to improve care including: (1) rapid translation of forthcoming data on reperfusion strategies into clinical practice; (2) improved risk stratification tools; (3) quality improvement initiatives to address presumptive anticoagulation practice gaps; and (3) adoption of health policy initiatives to establish pulmonary embolism response teams and address the social determinants of health. CONCLUSION: Addressing knowledge and practice gaps in intermediate and high-risk PE management must be prioritized and informed by forthcoming high-quality data. Implementation efforts are needed to improve acute PE management and resolve treatment disparities.

Management of high and intermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism: A position paper of the Interventional Cardiology Working Group of the Italian Society of Cardiology.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially life-threatening condition that remains a major global health concern. Noteworthy, patients with high- and intermediate-high-risk PE pose unique challenges because they often display clinical and hemodynamic instability, thus requiring rapid intervention to mitigate the risk of clinical deterioration and death. Importantly, recovery from PE is associated with long-term complications such as recurrences, bleeding with oral anticoagulant treatment, pulmonary hypertension, and psychological distress. Several novel strategies to improve risk factor characterization and management of patients with PE have recently been introduced. Accordingly, this position paper of the Working Group of Interventional Cardiology of the Italian Society of Cardiology deals with the landscape of high- and intermediate-high risk PE, with a focus on bridging the gap between the evolving standards of care and the current clinical practice. Specifically, the growing importance of catheter-directed therapies as part of the therapeutic armamentarium is highlighted. These interventions have been shown to be effective strategies in unstable patients since they offer, as compared with thrombolysis, faster and more effective restoration of hemodynamic stability with a consistent reduction in the risk of bleeding. Evolving standards of care underscore the need for continuous re-assessment of patient risk stratification. To this end, a multidisciplinary approach is paramount in refining selection criteria to deliver the most effective treatment to patients with unstable hemodynamics. In conclusion, the current management of unstable patients with PE should prioritize tailored treatment in a patient-oriented approach in which transcatheter therapies play a central role.

Efficacy and Safety of Anticoagulation, Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis, or Systemic Thrombolysis in Acute Pulmonary Embolism.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) (especially those with intermediate risk) continues to evolve and remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation (AC) alone, catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), and systemic thrombolysis (ST) in patients with acute PE. METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials or observational studies which compared outcomes of AC alone, CDT, and ST in acute PE. Efficacy outcome was all-cause mortality. Safety outcomes were major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). RESULTS: We identified 45 studies (17 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective nonrandomized trials, and 26 retrospective observational trials), which included 81,705 patients. When compared with AC alone, CDT had lower mortality (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.39-0.80) but higher major bleeding (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.10-3.08) and numerically higher ICH (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 0.75-3.04). ST was associated with no difference in mortality but higher major bleeding (OR: 2.16; 95% CI: 1.38-3.38) and ICH (OR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.14-4.48) when compared with AC alone. The risk of mortality (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.46-2.89) and ICH (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.13-1.99) was higher with ST when compared with CDT. Findings were similar when analysis was restricted to trials of intermediate risk PE. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute PE, when compared with AC alone, CDT was associated with a lower mortality but higher risk of bleeding. Moreover, CDT had an enhanced safety profile when compared with ST.

[Experience of using a Russian alteplase product as thrombolytic therapy in patients with ischemic stroke in routine practice]. / Primenenie otechestvennogo preparata alteplazy pri provedenii tromboliticheskoi terapii u patsientov s ishemicheskim insul'tom v rutinnoi praktike.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of thrombolytic therapy (TLT) with Revelisa in patients with ischemic stroke (IS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The retrospective study included the data of 72 patients (mean age 64.0±17.1) with IS who were admitted to the Regional Vascular Center of the V.V. Veresaev City Clinical Hospital within the first 4.5 hours after the disease onset in the period August 2022 through February 2023. All patients underwent clinical, instrumental and laboratory examinations under the reperfusion therapy protocol. The severity of neurological deficit measured with the NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS); the degree of self-care was assessed using the Modified Rankin Score (mRS); hemorrhagic transformation (HT) was classified according to the ECASS 3 criteria. The safety of TLT was evaluated by the incidence of HT, any extracranial hemorrhage, and mortality. RESULTS: At admission, the mean NIHSS score was 6.0 (IQR 4.0-10.0). In 34.7% of patients, there was an improvement in the form of neurological deficit regression in the NIHSS score by ≥4 points within 24 hours after TLT. One day after TLT, the median NIHSS score was 2 points (IQR 0.00-5.00) in all patients. The changes in neurological deficit according to the NIHSS score were statistically significant (p<0.001). At day 30 after the stroke, 68.1% of patients achieved a favorable outcome (Rankin score: 0-2). Asymptomatic HT (type 1 HT according to the ECASS classification) was reported in 5.6% of patients (4 patients). None of the patients in the sample reported symptomatic HT or extracranial bleeding. The mortality rate was 1.3%. CONCLUSION: Revelisa has demonstrated high efficacy and safety when used for TLT in patients with IS in real-world clinical practice.

Recurrent High-Risk Pulmonary Thromboembolism Treated with Repeated Thrombolytic Therapy Could be Helpful for Certain Patients: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) is considered the third most frequent acute cardiovascular syndrome behind myocardial infarction and stroke, with annual incidence rates ranging from 39 to 115 per 100,000 people and ranking high among the causes of cardiovascular mortality. High-risk PTE is characterised by haemodynamic instability and encompasses clinical manifestations such as cardiac arrest, obstructive shock and persistent hypotension. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends a reperfusion strategy with systemic thrombolytic therapy for high-risk PTE under class I, level B if there are no contraindications. Overall, unsuccessful thrombolytic therapy and recurrent PTE have been reported in 8% of patients with high-risk PTE. The guidelines recommend surgical pulmonary embolectomy if thrombolysis is contraindicated or has failed. The position of repeated thrombolytic therapy as a treatment option in patients with recurrent high-risk PTE, especially in situations with a lack of surgical expertise or resources, was not mentioned in the guidelines. We report the case of a patient who suffered a recurrent high-risk PTE and was treated with repeated thrombolytic therapy that was effective and resulted in excellent outcomes. LEARNING POINTS: Acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) is a serious medical condition and widespread disease with well-recognised morbidity and mortality.Systemic thrombolytic therapy should be the first choice in patients with high-risk PTE without contraindication.Repeated thrombolytic therapy in recurrent high-risk PTE might be effective in patients with low risk of bleeding as an alternative to surgical embolectomy or catheter-directed therapy.

Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing systemic thrombolysis to anticoagulation in intermediate risk pulmonary embolism (PE) have yielded mixed results. A prior meta-analysis on this topic had included studies that used lower than standard dose of thrombolytics and included thrombolytic agents that are no longer available. Hence, interpreting the findings of that paper is not valid in contemporary practice. OBJECTIVES: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytic agents vs anticoagulation in intermediate risk PE. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials were included in the study. We did not find any difference in in-hospital mortality (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.42-1.50; I2: 0) or risk of major bleeding (RR:2.08;95% CI: 0.98-4.42; I2: 23.9%) between systemic thrombolysis and anticoagulation. Systemic thrombolysis was associated with lower risks for vasopressor use (RR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.11-0.64, I2: 0) and secondary/rescue thrombolysis (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.14-0.45; I2: 0). But systemic thrombolysis was found to have an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage (RR: 4.55; 95% CI: 1.30-15.91; I2:0). There was no difference in mechanical ventilation between the two groups (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.31-1.19, I2:0). CONCLUSION: In our meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic thrombolysis vs anticoagulation in intermediate risk PE, we did not find any difference in in-hospital mortality or overall risk of major bleeding. With systemic thrombolysis, we found lower risks for vasopressor use and need for secondary/ rescue thrombolysis and an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage.

[Clinical Comparison of the Efficacy of Systemic Thrombolysis,Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis,and AngioJet Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy in Acute Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis].

Objective To compare the clinical effects of three treatment methods including systemic thrombolysis(ST),catheter-directed thrombolysis(CDT),and AngioJet percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy(PMT)in acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis(LEDVT). Methods The data of 82 patients diagnosed with LEDVT in the Department of Vascular and Gland Surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Hebei North University from January 2017 to December 2020 were collected.The patients were assigned into a ST group(n=50),a CDT group(n=16),and a PMT group(n=16)according to different treatment methods.The efficacy and safety were compared among the three groups. Results Compared with that before treatment,the circumferential diameter difference of both lower limbs on days 1,2,and 3 of treatment in the ST,CDT,and PMT groups reduced(all P<0.001).The PMT group showed smaller circumferential diameter difference of lower limbs on days 1,2,and 3 of treatment than the ST group(all P<0.001)and smaller circumferential diameter difference of the lower patellar margin on day 1 of treatment than the CDT group(P<0.001).The PMT group showed higher diminution rate for swelling of the affected limb at the upper and lower edges of the patella than the ST group(P<0.001)and higher diminution rate for swelling at the upper edge of the patella than the CDT group(P=0.026).The incidence of complications after treatment showed no significant differences among the three groups(all P>0.05).The median of hospital stay in the PMT group was shorter than that in the ST and CDT groups(P=0.002,P=0.001).The PMT group had higher thrombus clearance rate than the ST group(P=0.002)and no significant difference in the thrombus clearance rate from the CDT group(P=0.361).The vascular recanalization rates in the PMT(all P<0.001)and CDT(P<0.001,P=0.002,P=0.009)groups 3,6,and 12 months after treatment were higher than those in ST group,and there were no significant differences between PMT and CDT groups(P=0.341,P=0.210,P=0.341). Conclusions ST,CDT,and PMT demonstrated significant efficacy in the treatment of LEDVT,and PMT was superior to ST and CDT in terms of circumferential diameter difference of the lower limbs,diminution rate for swelling of the affected limb,thrombus clearance rate,length of hospital stay,and long-term vascular recanalization.There was no obvious difference in safety among the three therapies.

Comparison of interventions for intermediate to high-risk pulmonary embolism: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple interventions, including catheter-directed therapy (CDT), systemic thrombolysis (ST), surgical embolectomy (SE), and therapeutic anticoagulation (AC) have been used to treat intermediate to high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE), but the most effective and safest treatment remains unclear. Our study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety outcomes of each intervention. METHODS: We queried PubMed and EMBASE in January 2023 and performed a network meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT), including high or intermediate-risk PE patients, and comparing AC, CDT, SE, and ST. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and major bleeding. The secondary outcomes included long-term mortality (≥6 months), recurrent PE, minor bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: We identified 11 RCTs and 42 observational studies involving 157,454 patients. CDT was associated with lower in-hospital mortality than ST (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.41 [0.31-0.55]), AC (OR [95% CI]: 0.33 [0.20-0.53]), and SE (OR [95% CI]: 0.61 [0.39-0.96]). Recurrent PE in CDT was lower than ST (OR [95% CI]: 0.66 [0.50-0.87]), AC (OR [95% CI]: 0.36 [0.20-0.66]), and trended lower than SE (OR [95% CI]: 0.71 [0.40-1.26]). Notably, ST had higher major bleeding risks than CDT (OR [95% CI]: 1.51 [1.19-1.91]) and AC (OR [95% CI]: 2.21 [1.53-3.19]). By rankogram analysis, CDT presented the highest p-score in in-hospital mortality, long-term mortality, and recurrent PE. CONCLUSION: In this network meta-analysis of observational studies and RCTs involving patients with intermediate to high-risk PE, CDT was associated with improved mortality outcomes compared to other therapies, without significant additional bleeding risk.

Constrictive Pericarditis from an Atraumatic Hemopericardium After Systemic Thrombolysis for a Massive Pulmonary Embolism.

Constrictive pericarditis most commonly results from fibrosis and adhesions of the parietal and visceral pericardium due to long-standing inflammation. Common etiologies include idiopathic, post-surgical, radiation injury and infectious etiologies including tuberculosis. Traumatic hemopericardium is a rare cause of constrictive pericarditis but atraumatic hemopericardium causing constrictive pericarditis has not been reported in the literature to date. We present a case of constrictive pericarditis from an atraumatic hemopericardium after systemic thrombolysis for a massive pulmonary embolism.