Dept of Cardiology, University Hospital Jean Minjoz, Besançon, France.
EA3920, University of Burgundy Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.
Eur Respir J. 2022 Nov 3;60(5). doi: 10.1183/13993003.02977-2021. Print 2022 Nov.
The optimal pulmonary revascularisation strategy in high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) requiring implantation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remains controversial.
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence comparing mechanical embolectomy and other strategies, including systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed thrombolysis or ECMO as stand-alone therapy, with regard to mortality and bleeding outcomes.
We identified 835 studies, 17 of which were included, comprising 327 PE patients. Overall, 32.4% were treated with mechanical pulmonary reperfusion (of whom 85.9% had surgical embolectomy), while 67.6% received other strategies. The mortality rate was 22.6% in the mechanical reperfusion group and 42.8% in the "other strategies" group. The pooled odds ratio for mortality with mechanical reperfusion was 0.439 (95% CI 0.237-0.816) (p=0.009; I=35.2%) other reperfusion strategies and 0.368 (95% CI 0.185-0.733) (p=0.004; I=32.9%) for surgical embolectomy thrombolysis. The rate of bleeding in patients under ECMO was 22.2% in the mechanical reperfusion group and 19.1% in the "other strategies" group (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.54-2.96; I=7.7%). The meta-regression model did not identify any relationship between the covariates "more than one pulmonary reperfusion therapy", "ECMO implantation before pulmonary reperfusion therapy", "clinical presentation of PE" or "cancer-associated PE" and the associated outcomes.
The results of the present meta-analysis and meta-regression suggest that mechanical reperfusion, notably by surgical embolectomy, may yield favourable results regardless of the timing of ECMO implantation in the reperfusion timeline, independent of thrombolysis administration or cardiac arrest presentation.
在需要植入体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)的高危肺栓塞(PE)中,最佳的肺再血管化策略仍存在争议。
我们对比较机械取栓术和其他策略(包括全身溶栓、导管溶栓或 ECMO 作为单一疗法)的死亡率和出血结局的证据进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。
我们确定了 835 项研究,其中 17 项研究被纳入,共纳入 327 例 PE 患者。总体而言,32.4%的患者接受了机械性肺再灌注治疗(其中 85.9%接受了手术取栓术),而 67.6%的患者接受了其他策略。机械再灌注组的死亡率为 22.6%,其他策略组为 42.8%。机械再灌注组的死亡率合并优势比为 0.439(95%CI 0.237-0.816)(p=0.009;I=35.2%),其他再灌注策略的合并优势比为 0.368(95%CI 0.185-0.733)(p=0.004;I=32.9%),手术取栓术的合并优势比为 0.368(95%CI 0.185-0.733)(p=0.004;I=32.9%)。在接受 ECMO 的患者中,机械再灌注组的出血率为 22.2%,其他策略组为 19.1%(OR 1.27,95%CI 0.54-2.96;I=7.7%)。元回归模型未发现协变量“多次肺再灌注治疗”、“肺再灌注治疗前植入 ECMO”、“PE 的临床表现”或“癌症相关 PE”与相关结局之间存在任何关系。
本荟萃分析和元回归的结果表明,机械再灌注,特别是手术取栓术,可能会产生有利的结果,而与 ECMO 植入在再灌注时间线上的时机无关,也与溶栓治疗的应用或心脏骤停的表现无关。