Comparison of Efficacy of Different Treatments for Pulmonary Embolism

An optimal therapy for pulmonary embolism(PE) was explored by comparing three different methods in order to alleviate the sufferings of PE patients and reduce the mortality. Eighty patients with PE diagnosed by computed tomography angiography(CTA) were treated with thrombolysis, anticoagulation only...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Medical sciences Vol. 36; no. 2; pp. 254 - 258
Main Author 范阳 黄鹤 熊君 杨媚 孔彬 廖佳芬 贺王伟 王志强
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Wuhan Huazhong University of Science and Technology 01.04.2016
Hubei Key Laboratory of Cardiology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, China
Department of Cardiology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, China
Cardiovascular Research Institute, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, China
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:An optimal therapy for pulmonary embolism(PE) was explored by comparing three different methods in order to alleviate the sufferings of PE patients and reduce the mortality. Eighty patients with PE diagnosed by computed tomography angiography(CTA) were treated with thrombolysis, anticoagulation only, or surgery/intervention. The clinical efficacy of different treatments were compared and analyzed. Twenty-four out of the 26 patients(92%) in anticoagulation only group showed improvement in CTA and clinical presentations, which was significantly higher than that in the thrombolysis group(87%, n=39, P〈0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the rate of mortality between thrombolysis group and anticoagulation only group. In the surgery/interventional group(n=15), the success rate was 47%, and the mortality rate was 14%. Both of them were significantly different from those in thrombolysis and anticoagulation only groups(both P〈0.05). Log-rank analysis of the data of 5-year follow-up revealed that the survival time in surgery/intervention group was significantly shorter than in the other two groups(P0.05). It was suggested that it is of importance to choose the appropriate therapeutic regimen for PE patients. Mortality may be reduced and prognosis may be improved with anticoagulation only and thrombolysis therapy.
Bibliography:pulmonary embolism; treatment choice; evaluation of therapeutic efficacy; anticoagulation; thrombolysis
An optimal therapy for pulmonary embolism(PE) was explored by comparing three different methods in order to alleviate the sufferings of PE patients and reduce the mortality. Eighty patients with PE diagnosed by computed tomography angiography(CTA) were treated with thrombolysis, anticoagulation only, or surgery/intervention. The clinical efficacy of different treatments were compared and analyzed. Twenty-four out of the 26 patients(92%) in anticoagulation only group showed improvement in CTA and clinical presentations, which was significantly higher than that in the thrombolysis group(87%, n=39, P〈0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the rate of mortality between thrombolysis group and anticoagulation only group. In the surgery/interventional group(n=15), the success rate was 47%, and the mortality rate was 14%. Both of them were significantly different from those in thrombolysis and anticoagulation only groups(both P〈0.05). Log-rank analysis of the data of 5-year follow-up revealed that the survival time in surgery/intervention group was significantly shorter than in the other two groups(P0.05). It was suggested that it is of importance to choose the appropriate therapeutic regimen for PE patients. Mortality may be reduced and prognosis may be improved with anticoagulation only and thrombolysis therapy.
Yang FAN,He HUANG,Jun Xiong,Mei Yang,Bin KONG,Jia-fen LIAO,Wang-wei HE,Zhi-qiang WANG( I Department of Cardiology, 2Cardiovascular Research Institute, 3Hubei Key Laboratory of Cardiology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, China)
42-1679/R
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:1672-0733
1993-1352
1993-1352
DOI:10.1007/s11596-016-1576-9