Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism

Percutaneous interventions for pulmonary embolism

Pulmonary embolism (PE) ranks as a leading cause of in-hospital mortality and the third most common cause of cardiovascular death. The spectrum of PE manifestations varies widely, making it difficult to determine the best treatment approach for specific patients. Conventional treatment options include anticoagulation, thrombolysis, or surgery, but emerging percutaneous interventional procedures are being investigated for their potential benefits in heterogeneous PE populations. These novel interventional techniques encompass catheter-directed thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy, and hybrid approaches combining different mechanisms. Furthermore, inferior vena cava filters are also available as an option for PE prevention. Such interventions may offer faster improvements in right ventricular function, as well as in pulmonary and systemic haemodynamics, in individual patients. Moreover, percutaneous treatment may be a valid alternative to traditional therapies in high bleeding risk patients and could potentially reduce the burden of mortality related to major bleeds, such as that of haemorrhagic strokes. Nevertheless, the safety and efficacy of these techniques compared to conservative therapies have not been conclusively established. This review offers a comprehensive evaluation of the current evidence for percutaneous interventions in PE and provides guidance for selecting appropriate patients and treatments. It serves as a valuable resource for future researchers and clinicians seeking to advance this field. Additionally, we explore future perspectives, proposing "percutaneous primary pulmonary intervention" as a potential paradigm shift in the field.

Treatment of thrombosis in KD Patients using tissue plasminogen activator: a single center study

OBJECTIVE

The most severe complication associated with giant coronary aneurysm in children with Kawasaki disease is ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) caused by thrombosis. Addition of tissue plasminogen activator, Alteplase, in the treatment regimen can be an efficient thrombolytic therapy, and therefore can have a significantly positive impact on patients' quality of life in long term.

METHODS

Total four male KD patients with central thromboses in coronary aneurysm were treated in Pediatric Cardiology Department of Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, from January 2020 to August 2021. These patients received thrombolytic treatments including Alteplase once + Heparin for 1 week followed by continuous oral Warfarin + Aspirin + Clopidogrel.

RESULTS

4 young male KD patients had coronary aneurysm (CAA) complicated with total 7 occurrences of central thrombosis. These patients were given alteplase and heparin/oral Warfarin + Aspirin + Clopidogrel treatment. 9 days to 2 months later, thromboses were significantly dissolved. The treatment successfully diminished the thrombosis complication.

CONCLUSION

1. Pediatric KD patients complicated with coronary aneurysm thrombosis are prone to recurrence of thrombosis. 2.  In KD patients complicated with coronary aneurysm thrombosis, treatments described in Method can be used for treating either small thromboses formed less than 1 month with strong echo and convex lumen or large thromboses with mixed strong and weak echo. With these treatments, coronary artery blood flow can be improved or completely recovered. 3. Clinical experiences at our center in treating these KD patients suggest that Alteplase can be considered in thrombolytic treatment beyond the limitation of less than 12 h of thrombosis occurrence.

Associations between SARS-CoV-2 infections and thrombotic complications necessitating surgical intervention: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several unique clinical features of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, have been identified and characterized. One such feature, mostly among patients with severe COVID-19 infection, has become known as COVID-19-induced coagulopathy. Surgical patients with a history of or active COVID-19 infection bear a significantly higher risk for postoperative thrombotic complications. These patients may require surgical intervention to treat severe thrombotic complications. Few studies have been carried out to better characterize this association. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on COVID-19 infections that led to thrombotic complications necessitating surgical intervention. We hypothesized that patients with recent or active COVID-19 infection would have high rates of thromboembolic complications both arterial and venous in origin.

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on COVID-19 infections that led to thrombotic complications necessitating surgical intervention.

METHODS

The current systematic review implemented an algorithmic approach to review all the currently available English medical literature on surgical interventions necessitated by COVID-19 thrombotic complications using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis principles. A comprehensive search of the medical literature in the "PubMed", "Scopus", "Google Scholar" top 100 results, and archives of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery was performed using the key words "COVID-19" AND "surgery" AND "thromboembolism" AND "complication". The search string was generated and the records which were not specific about surgical interventions or thrombotic complications due to COVID-19 infection were excluded. Titles and abstracts were screened by two authors and full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and inclusion. Finally, results were further refined to focus on articles that focused on surgical interventions that were necessitated by COVID-19 thrombotic complications.

RESULTS

The database search resulted in the final inclusion of 22 retrospective studies, after application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Of the included studies, 17 were single case reports, 3 were case series and 2 were cross sectional cohort studies. All studies were retrospective in nature. Twelve of the reported studies were conducted in the United States of America, with the remaining studies originating from Italy, Turkey, Pakistan, France, Serbia, and Germany. All cases reported in our study were laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 positive. A total of 70 cases involving surgical intervention were isolated from the 22 studies included in this review.

CONCLUSION

There is paucity of data describing the relationship between COVID-19 infection and thrombotic complications necessitating the need for surgical intervention. Intestinal ischemia and acute limb ischemia are amongst the most common thrombotic events due to COVID-19 that required operative management. An overall postoperative mortality of 30% was found in those who underwent operative procedures for thrombotic complications, with most deaths occurring in those with bowel ischemia. Physicians should be aware that despite thromboprophylaxis, severe thrombotic complications can still occur in this patient population, however, surgical intervention results in relatively low mortality apart from cases of ischemic bowel resection.

Echocardiographic predictors of mortality in intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism

Data regarding further risk stratification of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (IR-PE) are scanty. Whether transthoracic echocardiography may be helpful in further risk assessment of death in such population has still to be proven. Two-hundred fifty-four consecutive patients (51.6% females, age 63.7 ± 17.3 years) with IR-PE admitted to a tertiary regional referral center were enrolled. Patients underwent a complete transthoracic echocardiography within 36 h from hospital admission, on top of clinical assessment, physical examination, computer tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), and serum measurement of Troponin I (TnI) levels. The occurrence of 90 day mortality was chosen as primary outcome measure. When compared to survivors, non-surviving IR-PE patients had smaller left-ventricular end-diastolic volumes (39.8 ± 20.9 vs 49.4 ± 19.9 ml/m², p = 0.006) with reduced stroke volume index (SVi) (24.7 ± 10.9 vs 30.9 ± 12.6 ml/m², p: 0.004) and time-velocity integral at left-ventricular outflow tract (VTI_LVOT) (0.17 ± 0.03 vs 0.20 ± 0.04 m, p = 0.0001), whereas no differences were recorded regarding right heart parameters. Cox regression analysis revealed that right atrial enlargement (RAE) (HR 3.432, 5-95% CI 1.193-9.876, p: 0.022), the ratio between tricuspid annulus plane excursion and pulmonary arterial systolic pressure (TAPSE/PASp) (HR 4.833, 5-95% 1.230-18.986, p = 0.024), as well as SVi (HR 11.199, 5-95% CI 2.697-48.096, p = 0.001) and VTI_LVOT (HR 4.212, 5-95% CI 1.384-12.820, p = 0.011) were powerful independent predictors of mortality. Neither CTPA RV/LV nor TnI resulted associated with impaired survival. In intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism, RAE, TAPSE/PASp ratio, SVi, and VTI_LVOT predict independently prognosis to a greater extent than CTPA and TnI.

Inpatient Management of Pulmonary Embolism: Clinical Characteristics and Mortality in a High-Volume Tertiary Care Center

The optimal management strategy for submassive or intermediate risk pulmonary embolism (IRPE)-anticoagulation alone versus anticoagulation plus advanced therapies-remains in equipoise leading many institutions to create multidisciplinary PE response teams (PERTs) to guide therapy. Cause-specific mortality of IRPE has not been thoroughly examined, which is a meaningful outcome when examining the effect of specific interventions for PE. In this retrospective study, we reviewed all adult inpatient admissions between 8/1/2018 and 8/1/2019 with an encounter diagnosis of PE to study all cause and PE cause specific mortality as the primary outcomes and bleeding complications from therapies as a secondary outcome. There were 429 total inpatient admissions, of which 59.7% were IRPE. The IRPE 30-day all-cause mortality was 8.7% and PE cause-specific mortality was 0.79%. Treatment consisted of anticoagulation alone in 93.4% of cases. Advanced therapies-systemic thrombolysis, catheter directed thrombolysis, or mechanical thrombectomy, were performed in only six IRPE cases (2.3%). Decompensation of IRPE cases requiring higher level of care and/or rescue advanced therapy occurred in only five cases (2%). In-hospital major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding were more common in those receiving systemic thrombolysis (61.5%) compared to anticoagulation combined with other advanced therapies (11.7%). Despite the high overall acuity of PE cases at our institution, in-hospital all-cause mortality was low and cause-specific mortality for IRPE was rare. These data suggest the need to target other clinically meaningful outcomes when examining advanced therapies for IRPE.

Fluorescently conjugated annular fibrin clot for multiplexed real-time digestion analysis

Impaired fibrinolysis has long been considered as a risk factor for venous thromboembolism. Fibrin clots formed at physiological concentrations are promising substrates for monitoring fibrinolytic performance as they offer clot microstructures resembling in vivo. Here we introduce a fluorescently labeled fibrin clot lysis assay which leverages a unique annular clot geometry assayed using a microplate reader. A physiologically relevant fibrin clotting formulation was explored to achieve high assay sensitivity while minimizing labeling impact as fluorescence isothiocyanate (FITC)-fibrin(ogen) conjugations significantly affect both fibrin polymerization and fibrinolysis. Clot characteristics were examined using thromboelastography (TEG), turbidity, scanning electron microscopy, and confocal microscopy. Sample fibrinolytic activities at varying plasmin, plasminogen, and tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) concentrations were assessed in the present study and results were compared to an S2251 chromogenic assay. The optimized physiologically relevant clot substrate showed minimal reporter-conjugation impact with nearly physiological clot properties. The assay demonstrated good reproducibility, wide working range, kinetic read ability, low limit of detection, and the capability to distinguish fibrin binding-related lytic performance. In combination with its ease for multiplexing, it also has applications as a convenient platform for assessing patient fibrinolytic potential and screening thrombolytic drug activities in personalized medical applications.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for people with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the fourth update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 17 August 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for people with acute PE (massive/submassive). We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (ZZ, QH) assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI. The primary outcomes of interest were death, recurrence of PE and haemorrhagic events. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three new studies for inclusion in this update. We included 21 trials in the review, with a total of 2401 participants. No studies compared thrombolytics versus surgical intervention. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no extractable data. Most studies carried a high or unclear risk of bias related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared to control (heparin alone or heparin plus placebo), thrombolytics plus heparin probably reduce both the odds of death (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.88; 19 studies, 2319 participants; low-certainty evidence), and recurrence of PE (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.91; 12 studies, 2050 participants; low-certainty evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when six studies at high risk of bias were excluded from analysis (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13; 13 studies, 2046 participants) and in the analysis of submassive PE participants (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02; 1993 participants). Effects on recurrence of PE also weakened after removing one study at high risk of bias for sensitivity analysis (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.04; 11 studies, 1949 participants). We downgraded the certainty of evidence to low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns. Major haemorrhagic events were probably more common in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.92 to 4.20; 15 studies, 2101 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), as were minor haemorrhagic events (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.66 to 5.30; 13 studies,1757 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate or low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns and inconsistency. Haemorrhagic stroke may occur more often in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 7.59, 95% CI 1.38 to 41.72; 2 studies, 1091 participants). Limited data indicated that thrombolytics may benefit haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, composite clinical outcomes, need for escalation and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when interpreting results. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (mean difference (MD) -1.40 days, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.11; 5 studies, 368 participants). Haemodynamic decompensation may occur less in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.66; 3 studies, 1157 participants). Quality of life was similar between the two treatment groups. None of the included studies provided data on post-thrombotic syndrome or on cost comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests that thrombolytics may reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin (the effectiveness was mainly driven by one trial with massive PE). Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause more major and minor haemorrhagic events, including haemorrhagic stroke. More studies of high methodological quality are needed to assess safety and cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy for people with pulmonary embolism.

Review of Medical Therapies for the Management of Pulmonary Embolism

Traditionally, the management of patients with pulmonary embolism has been accomplished with anticoagulant treatment with parenteral heparins and oral vitamin K antagonists. Although the administration of heparins and oral vitamin K antagonists still plays a role in pulmonary embolism management, the use of these therapies are limited due to other options now available. This is due to their toxicity profile, clearance limitations, and many interactions with other medications and nutrients. The emergence of direct oral anticoagulation therapies has led to more options now being available to manage pulmonary embolism in inpatient and outpatient settings conveniently. These oral therapeutic options have opened up opportunities for safe and effective pulmonary embolism management, as more evidence and research is now available about reversal agents and monitoring parameters. The evolution of the pharmacological management of pulmonary embolism has provided us with better understanding regarding the selection of anticoagulants. There is also a better understanding and employment of anticoagulants in pulmonary embolism in special populations, such as patients with liver failure, renal failure, malignancy, and COVID-19.

Thrombolytic therapy in acute venous thromboembolism

Although anticoagulation remains the mainstay of treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), the use of thrombolytic agents or thrombectomy is required to immediately restore blood flow to thrombosed vessels. Nevertheless, systemic thrombolysis has not clearly been shown to improve outcomes in patients with large clot burdens in the lung or legs as compared with anticoagulation alone; this is in part due to the occurrence of intracranial hemorrhage in a small percentage of patients to whom therapeutic doses of a thrombolytic drug are administered. Algorithms have been developed to identify patients at high risk for poor outcomes resulting from large clot burdens and at low risk for major bleeding in an effort to improve outcomes in those receiving thrombolytic therapy. In acute pulmonary embolism (PE), hemodynamic instability is the key determinant of short-term survival and should prompt consideration of immediate thrombolysis. In hemodynamically stable PE, systemic thrombolysis is not recommended and should be used as rescue therapy if clinical deterioration occurs. Evidence is accumulating regarding the efficacy of administering reduced doses of thrombolytic agents systemically or via catheters directly into thrombi in an effort to lower bleed rates. In acute deep venous thrombosis, catheter-directed thrombolysis with thrombectomy can be used in severe or limb-threatening thrombosis but has not been shown to prevent postthrombotic syndrome. Because the management of acute VTE can be complex, having a rapid-response team (ie, PE response team) composed of physicians from different specialties may aid in the management of severely affected patients.

Fibrinolytics for the treatment of pulmonary embolism

The use of fibrinolytic agents in acute pulmonary embolism (PE), first described over 50 years ago, hastens the resolution of RV stain, leading to earlier hemodynamic improvement. However, this benefit comes at the increased risk of bleeding. The strongest indication for fibrinolysis is in high-risk PE, or that characterized by sustained hypotension, while its use in patients with intermediate-risk PE remains controversial. Fibrinolysis is generally not recommended for routine use in intermediate-risk PE, although most guidelines advise that it may be considered in patients with signs of acute decompensation and an overall low bleeding risk. The efficacy of fibrinolysis often varies significantly between patients, which may be at least partially explained by several factors found to promote resistance to fibrinolysis. Ultimately, treatment decisions should carefully weigh the risks and benefits of the individual clinical scenario at hand, including the overall severity, the patient's bleeding risk, and the presence of factors known to promote resistance to fibrinolysis. This review aims to further explore the use of fibrinolytic agents in the treatment of PE including specific indications, outcomes, and special considerations.

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), occurs in ∼1 to 2 individuals per 1000 each year, corresponding to ∼300 000 to 600 000 events in the United States annually.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about treatment of VTE.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and adult patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 28 recommendations for the initial management of VTE, primary treatment, secondary prevention, and treatment of recurrent VTE events.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE and hemodynamic compromise, use of an international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 over a lower INR range for patients with VTE who use a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for secondary prevention, and use of indefinite anticoagulation for patients with recurrent unprovoked VTE. Conditional recommendations include the preference for home treatment over hospital-based treatment for uncomplicated DVT and PE at low risk for complications and a preference for direct oral anticoagulants over VKA for primary treatment of VTE.

Acute cor pulmonale from saddle pulmonary embolism in a patient with previous COVID-19: should we prolong prophylactic anticoagulation?

Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is known to be associated with a heightened risk of thromboembolism. However, the risk associated with mild and moderate illness from COVID-19 is unknown, and there is no current recommendation for prophylaxis against thromboembolism in patients after hospital treatment, unless there are established thrombophilic risk factors. We report the case of a 52-year-old woman who presented with massive saddle pulmonary embolism 1 week after initial hospital discharge, which was treated successfully with thrombolysis. This case raises the question of whether extended prophylactic anticoagulation should be considered even in low-risk COVID-19 cases.

Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Contemporary Approach to Diagnosis, Risk-Stratification, and Management

Pulmonary embolism (PE) affects over 300,000 individuals each year in the United States and is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Improvements in the diagnostic performance and availability of computed tomographic pulmonary angiography and D-dimer testing have facilitated the evaluation of patients with suspected PE. High clinical suspicion is required in those with risk factors and/or those that manifest signs or symptoms of venous thromboembolic disease, with validated clinical risk scores such as the Wells and modified Wells score or the PE rule-out criteria helpful in estimating the likelihood for PE. For those with confirmed PE, patients should be categorized and triaged according to the presence or absence of shock or hypotension. Normotensive patients can be further risk-stratified using validated prognostic risk scores, as well as by using imaging and cardiac biomarkers, with those having either signs of right ventricular dysfunction on imaging studies and/or abnormal cardiac biomarkers categorized as being at intermediate-risk and requiring close monitoring and hospital admission. Early discharge and/or home therapy are possible in those that do not manifest any high-risk features. The initial treatment for most patients that are stable consists of anticoagulation, with advanced therapies such as thrombolysis, catheter-based therapies, or surgical embolectomy deferred for those at high risk. Given the heterogeneous presentations of PE and various management strategies available, the development of multidisciplinary PE response teams has emerged to help facilitate decision-making in these patients.

Half-dose thrombolytic therapy in patients with right heart thrombi

The management of floating right heart thrombi (FRHT) in patients with acute pulmonary emboli is controversial. Several recent case series have revealed similar efficacy and better survival rates with systemic thrombolytic therapy than with surgery. In this case series, we present our experience with the efficacy of “half-dose” or “safe-dose” thrombolytic therapy in the resolution of FRHT. Five patients who were admitted with confirmed acute pulmonary emboli and FRHT were included in the present report. Half-dose thrombolytic therapy (50 mg of alteplase) was administered to the patients. Follow-up echocardiography revealed complete resolution of the FRHT and considerable improvement in the right heart function. No bleeding events were recorded. Our small case series shows the efficacy and safety of half-dose thrombolytic therapy in FRHT resolution in a group of patients with high bleeding risk. Our findings should be tested in larger populations.

Use of reteplase for thrombolysis in patients with massive pulmonary embolism diagnosed by bedside transthoracic echocardiography: A retrospective study of safety and efficacy

Background:

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a lethal clinical condition requiring immediate systemic thrombolysis to decrease mortality. Reteplase has been extensively used in acute myocardial infarction but studies in massive PE are rare. We have presented here efficacy and safety of reteplase in patients with high risk PE diagnosed on basis of bedside transthoracic echocardiography.

Methods:

This was retrospective study including 20 patients of massive PE undergoing thrombolysis with reteplase. Bedside TTE was used to evaluate presence of RV dysfunction and thrombi in these patients with hemodynamic compromise. Safety and efficacy outcomes were analysed till three months of follow up.

Results:

12 patients (60%) included in the study were males and mean age was 41 ± 19 years. The dyspnoea, chest pain and haemoptysis improved in all patients after thrombolysis. At discharge, RV dilatation normalised, systolic pulmonary artery pressure decreased, systolic blood pressure significantly increased and hypoxemia had completely corrected. Two patients had minor self-limiting bleeding episodes in form of mild haematuria and oral bleeding. During the follow up period of 3 months all patients were clinically stable and there were no bleeding episodes or death. Moreover, there was no recurrence of PE and/or DVT.

Conclusion:

Reteplase is highly efficacious in massive pulmonary embolism and results in rapid clinical improvement. Moreover, it can be safely used without increased risk of significant bleeding or mortality. Although limited by retrospective nature, reteplase appears to be an attractive option for massive PE but large prospective studies are further required.