Abstract

The aim of the study was to assess the utilization of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and its comparative effectiveness against systemic thrombolysis in acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Contemporary real world data regarding utilization and outcomes comparing systemic thrombolysis with CDT for PE is sparse. We queried the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2012 using the ICD-9-CM diagnosis code 415.11, 415.13, and 415.19 for acute PE. We used propensity score analysis to compare outcomes between systemic thrombolysis and CDT. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome was combined in-hospital mortality and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Out of 110,731 patients hospitalized with PE, we identified 1,521 patients treated with thrombolysis, of which 1,169 patients received systemic thrombolysis and 352 patients received CDT. After propensity-matched comparison, primary and secondary outcomes were significantly lower in the CDT group compared to systemic thrombolysis (21.81% vs. 13.36%, OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36-0.85, P value = 0.007) and (22.89% vs. 13.36%, OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34-0.80, P value = 0.003), respectively. The median length of stay [7 days, interquartile range (IQR) (5-9 days) vs. 7 days, IQR (5-10 days), P = 0.17] was not significant between the two groups. The CDT group had higher cost of hospitalization [$17,218, IQR ($12,272-$23,906) vs. $23,799, IQR ($17,892-$35,338), P < 0.001]. Multivariate analysis identified increasing age, saddle PE, cardiopulmonary arrest, and Medicaid insurance as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. CDT was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and combined in-hospital mortality and ICH.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.