Large-bore aspiration thrombectomy versus catheter-directed thrombolysis for the treatment of pulmonary embolism: A retrospective case review from a community hospital

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess acute outcomes following pulmonary embolism (PE) treatment with large-bore aspiration thrombectomy (LBAT) versus catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). Material and Methods: This single-center retrospective analysis included patients who received interventional therapy for acute PE from 2018 to 2022. The primary outcomes were changes in pre-procedural mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP), heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation, and supplemental requirements following the procedure. Mean PAP was measured immediately post-procedure for LBAT patients and on postoperative day 1 (POD#1) for CDT patients. Results: A total of 48 patient cases were reviewed, 31 underwent LBAT and 17 underwent CDT. The majority of patients were female and most had intermediate-high-risk PE. No major bleeding events or device-related complications occurred. LBAT resulted in a significant decrease in average mean PAP immediately post-procedure (31.3 ± 9.0–21.4 ± 8.1 mmHg; P < 0.001). On POD#1, CDT resulted in a significant decrease in mean PAP (31.7 ± 11.2–25.6 ± 7.9 mmHg; P = 0.005). The decrease in mean PAP was greater in the LBAT versus CDT group (P < 0.05). Through POD#1, a similar reduction in average HR was observed between groups; however, a statistically significant reduction in HR was noted immediately post-procedure with LBAT and not with CDT. LBAT patients had a significant reduction in average supplemental oxygen requirements post-procedure. Conclusion: LBAT was associated with a greater reduction in mean PAP than CDT at an earlier post-procedural time point. LBAT may be advantageous over CDT due to rapid thrombus extraction; however, further studies with increased sample sizes are needed. Evidence-based medicine: Level of Evidence: Level 3, Local non-random sample.