Efthymios D Avgerinos1, Zein Saadeddin1, Adham N Abou Ali1, Larry Fish1, Catalin Toma2, Maria Chaer1, Belinda N Rivera-Lebron3, Rabih A Chaer4. 1. Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa. 2. Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa. 4. Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa. Electronic address: chaerra@upmc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: During the past few years, there has been a surge in the use of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for acute pulmonary embolism (PE), in the form of either standard CDT or ultrasound-assisted CDT (usCDT). This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published series on contemporary CDT for acute PE seeking to determine their clinical efficacy, stratifying by PE severity and CDT modality. METHODS: A comprehensive MEDLINE and Embase search was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of CDT for acute PE published from 2009 to July 2017. Outcomes included clinical success (in-hospital survival with stabilization of hemodynamics, without decompensation or any major complication), in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, right ventricular/left ventricular ratio, and Miller score changes after CDT. Meta-analyses assumed random effects. RESULTS: Twenty studies with 1168 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Available for subgroup analysis were 210 patients with high-risk PE and 945 patients with intermediate-risk PE; 181 patients received CDT using a standard multiside hole catheter, and 850 received usCDT. The pooled average right ventricular/left ventricular improvement and Miller score drop after CDT were 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.39) and 8.8 (95% CI, 7.1-10.5). For high-risk PE, the pooled estimate for clinical success was 81.3% (95% CI, 72.5%-89.1%), the 30-day mortality estimate was 8.0% (95% CI, 3.2%-14.0%), and major bleeding was 6.7% (95% CI, 1.0%-15.3%). For intermediate-risk PE, the pooled estimate for clinical success was 97.5% (95% CI, 95.3%-99.1%), the 30-day mortality was 0% (95% CI, 0%-0.5%), and major bleeding was 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3%-2.8%). In high-risk PE, clinical success for CDT and usCDT was 70.8% (95% CI, 53.4%-85.8%) and 83.1% (95% CI, 68.5%-94.5%), respectively. In intermediate-risk PE, clinical success for CDT and usCDT was 95.0% (95% CI, 88.5%-99.2%) and 97.5% (95% CI, 95.0%-99.4%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter thrombolysis has high clinical success rates in both high- and intermediate-risk PE, but higher mortality and bleeding rates should be anticipated in high-risk PE. Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis may be more effective than standard CDT in the higher risk population.
OBJECTIVE: During the past few years, there has been a surge in the use of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for acute pulmonary embolism (PE), in the form of either standard CDT or ultrasound-assisted CDT (usCDT). This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published series on contemporary CDT for acute PE seeking to determine their clinical efficacy, stratifying by PE severity and CDT modality. METHODS: A comprehensive MEDLINE and Embase search was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of CDT for acute PE published from 2009 to July 2017. Outcomes included clinical success (in-hospital survival with stabilization of hemodynamics, without decompensation or any major complication), in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, right ventricular/left ventricular ratio, and Miller score changes after CDT. Meta-analyses assumed random effects. RESULTS: Twenty studies with 1168 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Available for subgroup analysis were 210 patients with high-risk PE and 945 patients with intermediate-risk PE; 181 patients received CDT using a standard multiside hole catheter, and 850 received usCDT. The pooled average right ventricular/left ventricular improvement and Miller score drop after CDT were 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.39) and 8.8 (95% CI, 7.1-10.5). For high-risk PE, the pooled estimate for clinical success was 81.3% (95% CI, 72.5%-89.1%), the 30-day mortality estimate was 8.0% (95% CI, 3.2%-14.0%), and major bleeding was 6.7% (95% CI, 1.0%-15.3%). For intermediate-risk PE, the pooled estimate for clinical success was 97.5% (95% CI, 95.3%-99.1%), the 30-day mortality was 0% (95% CI, 0%-0.5%), and major bleeding was 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3%-2.8%). In high-risk PE, clinical success for CDT and usCDT was 70.8% (95% CI, 53.4%-85.8%) and 83.1% (95% CI, 68.5%-94.5%), respectively. In intermediate-risk PE, clinical success for CDT and usCDT was 95.0% (95% CI, 88.5%-99.2%) and 97.5% (95% CI, 95.0%-99.4%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter thrombolysis has high clinical success rates in both high- and intermediate-risk PE, but higher mortality and bleeding rates should be anticipated in high-risk PE. Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis may be more effective than standard CDT in the higher risk population.
Authors: Jean-Pierre Iskandar; Essa Hariri; Christopher Kanaan; Nicholas Kassis; Hayaan Kamran; Denise Sese; Colin Wright; Mark Marinescu; Scott J Cameron Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2021-09-29 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Arkadiusz Pietrasik; Aleksandra Gąsecka; Łukasz Szarpak; Michał Pruc; Tomasz Kopiec; Szymon Darocha; Marta Banaszkiewicz; Maciej Niewada; Marcin Grabowski; Marcin Kurzyna Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-06-16
Authors: Catherine Ross; Riten Kumar; Marie-Claude Pelland-Marcotte; Shivani Mehta; Monica E Kleinman; Ravi R Thiagarajan; Muhammad B Ghbeis; Christina J VanderPluym; Kevin G Friedman; Diego Porras; Francis Fynn-Thompson; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Leonardo R Brandão Journal: Chest Date: 2021-09-26 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Efthymios D Avgerinos; Wissam Jaber; Joan Lacomis; Kyle Markel; Michael McDaniel; Belinda N Rivera-Lebron; Charles B Ross; Jacob Sechrist; Catalin Toma; Rabih Chaer Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2021-06-28 Impact factor: 11.075