Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Section of Vascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Desk J-35, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA.
J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2022 Apr;53(3):616-625. doi: 10.1007/s11239-021-02576-3. Epub 2021 Sep 29.
The decision by pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) to utilize anticoagulation (AC) with or without systemic thrombolysis (ST) or catheter-directed therapies (CDT) for pulmonary embolism (PE) is a balance between the desire for a positive outcome and safety. Our primary aim was to develop a predictive model of in-hospital mortality for patients with high- or intermediate-risk PE managed by PERT while externally validating this model. Our secondary aim was to compare the relative safety and efficacy of ST and CDT in this cohort. Consecutive patients hospitalized between June 2014 and January 2020 at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation and The University of Rochester with acute high- or intermediate-risk PE managed by PERT were retrospectively evaluated. Groups were stratified by treatment strategy. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcome was major bleeding. A logistic regression model to predict the primary outcome was built using the derivation cohort, with 100-fold bootstrapping for internal validation. External validation was performed and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was calculated. Of 549 included patients, 421 received AC alone, 71 received ST, and 64 received CDT. Predictors of major bleeding include ESC risk category, PESI score, hypoxia, hemodynamic instability, and serum lactate. CDT trended towards lower mortality but with an increased risk of bleeding relative to ST (OR = 0.42; 95% CI [0.15, 1.17] and OR = 2.14; 95% CI [0.9, 5.06] respectively). In the multivariable logistic regression model in the derivation institution cohort, predictors of in-hospital mortality were age, cancer, hemodynamic instability requiring vasopressors, and elevated NT-proBNP (AUC = 0.86). This model was validated using the validation institution cohort (AUC = 0.88). We report an externally-validated model for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with PE managed by PERT. The decision by PERT to initiate CDT or ST for these patients had no impact on mortality or major bleeding, yet the long-term efficacy of these interventions needs to be elucidated.
肺栓塞反应团队 (PERT) 决定对肺栓塞 (PE) 患者使用抗凝 (AC) 联合或不联合全身溶栓 (ST) 或导管定向治疗 (CDT),这是在追求良好结果和安全性之间的平衡。我们的主要目的是为 PERT 治疗的高危或中危 PE 患者建立住院死亡率的预测模型,并对该模型进行外部验证。我们的次要目的是比较该队列中 ST 和 CDT 的相对安全性和疗效。回顾性评估了 2014 年 6 月至 2020 年 1 月期间在克利夫兰诊所基金会和罗彻斯特大学因急性高危或中危 PE 而接受 PERT 治疗的连续住院患者。根据治疗策略对患者进行分层。主要结局是住院死亡率,次要结局是大出血。使用推导队列建立预测主要结局的逻辑回归模型,并进行 100 倍自举进行内部验证。进行外部验证并计算接收器操作曲线下面积 (AUC)。在纳入的 549 例患者中,421 例仅接受 AC 治疗,71 例接受 ST 治疗,64 例接受 CDT 治疗。大出血的预测因素包括 ESC 风险类别、PESI 评分、缺氧、血流动力学不稳定和血清乳酸。与 ST 相比,CDT 趋势显示死亡率较低,但出血风险增加(OR=0.42;95%CI [0.15, 1.17] 和 OR=2.14;95%CI [0.9, 5.06])。在推导机构队列的多变量逻辑回归模型中,住院死亡率的预测因素为年龄、癌症、需要血管加压药的血流动力学不稳定和升高的 NT-proBNP(AUC=0.86)。该模型使用验证机构队列进行验证(AUC=0.88)。我们报告了一种针对 PERT 治疗的 PE 患者住院死亡率的外部验证模型。PERT 决定对这些患者使用 CDT 或 ST 的决策对死亡率或大出血没有影响,但这些干预措施的长期疗效仍需阐明。