Publicação
Underuse of reperfusion therapy with systemic thrombolysis in high-risk acute pulmonary embolism in a Portuguese center
| Resumo: | 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. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Martinho, Mariana |
| Outros Autores: | Calé, Rita; Grade Santos, João; Rita Pereira, Ana; Alegria, Sofia; Ferreira, Filipa; José Loureiro, Maria; Judas, Tiago; Ferreira, Melanie; Gomes, Ana; Morgado, Gonçalo; Martins, Cristina; Gonzalez, Filipe; Lohmann, Corinna; Delerue, Francisca; Pereira, Hélder |
| Assunto: | High-risk pulmonary embolism Reperfusion Systemic thrombolysis |
| Ano: | 2024 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa |
| Resumo: | 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. |
|---|