Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Meneveau, N.
Right arrow Articles by Bassand, J.-P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Meneveau, N.
Right arrow Articles by Bassand, J.-P.
(Chest. 2006;129:1043-1050.)
© 2006 American College of Chest Physicians

Management of Unsuccessful Thrombolysis in Acute Massive Pulmonary Embolism*

Nicolas Meneveau, MD, PhD; Marie-France Séronde, MD; Marie-Cécile Blonde, MD; Pierre Legalery, MD; Katy Didier-Petit, MD; Florent Briand, MD; Fiona Caulfield, MSc; François Schiele, MD, PhD; Yvette Bernard, MD and Jean-Pierre Bassand, MD

* From the Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Jean Minjoz, Besançon, France.

Correspondence to: Nicolas Meneveau, MD, PhD, FESC, Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Jean-Minjoz, Blvd Fleming, 25030 Besançon Cedex, France; e-mail: nicolas.meneveau{at}ufc-chu.univ-fcomte.fr

Abstract

Background: The management of patients with acute massive pulmonary embolism (PE) who do not respond to fibrinolytic therapy remains unclear. We aimed to compare rescue surgical embolectomy and repeat thrombolysis in patients who did not respond to thrombolysis.

Methods: We conducted a prospective single-center registry of PE patients who underwent thrombolytic therapy. Lack of response to thrombolysis within the first 36 h was prospectively defined as both persistent clinical instability and residual echocardiographic right ventricular dysfunction. Patients underwent surgical embolectomy or repeat thrombolysis, at the discretion of the attending physician. The clinical end point was a combined end point including recurrent PE, bleeding complications, or PE-related death, which was defined as death from recurrent PE or cardiogenic shock. Long-term adverse outcomes included death, recurrent thromboembolic events, and congestive heart failure.

Results: From January 1995 to January 2005, 488 PE patients underwent thrombolysis, of whom 40 (8.2%) did not respond to thrombolysis. Fourteen patients were treated by rescue surgical embolectomy, and 26 were treated by repeat thrombolysis. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The in-hospital course was uneventful in 11 of the surgically treated patients (79%) and in 8 patients (31%) treated by repeat thrombolysis (p = 0.004). There was a trend for higher mortality in the medical group than in the surgical group (10 vs 1 deaths, respectively; p = 0.07). There were significantly more recurrent PEs (fatal and nonfatal) in the repeat-thrombolysis group (35% vs 0%, respectively; p = 0.015). While no significant difference was observed in number of major bleeding events, all bleeding events in the repeat-thrombolysis group were fatal. The rate of uneventful long-term evolution was the same in the two groups.

Conclusion: Rescue surgical embolectomy led to a better in-hospital course when compared with repeat thrombolysis in patients with massive PE who have not responded to thrombolysis. The transfer of patients who have not responded to thrombolysis to tertiary cardiac surgery centers could be considered as an alternative option.

Key Words: embolism • surgery • thrombolysis




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ChestHome page
G. Eid-Lidt, J. Gaspar, J. Sandoval, F. D. de los Santos, T. Pulido, H. Gonzalez Pacheco, and C. Martinez-Sanchez
Combined Clot Fragmentation and Aspiration in Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism
Chest, July 1, 2008; 134(1): 54 - 60.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
N. Kumar, Y. Janjigian, and D. R. Schwartz
Paradoxical Worsening of Shock After the Use of a Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy Device in a Postpartum Patient With a Massive Pulmonary Embolism
Chest, August 1, 2007; 132(2): 677 - 679.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
D. J. Carlbom and B. L. Davidson
Pulmonary Embolism in the Critically Ill
Chest, July 1, 2007; 132(1): 313 - 324.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
B. Davidson and R. Karmy-Jones
When Pulmonary Embolism Treatment Isn't Working.
Chest, April 1, 2006; 129(4): 839 - 840.
[Full Text] [PDF]

eLetters:

Read all eLetters

Acute massive pulmonary embolism - the role of venous filters
Witold Z. Tomkowski, et al.
Chest Online, 25 May 2006 [Full text]



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American College of Chest Physicians.