Cargando…
Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing systemic thrombolysis to anticoagulation in intermediate risk pulmonary embolism (PE) have yielded mixed results. A prior meta-analysis on this topic had included studies that used lower than standard dose of thrombolytics and included thromb...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10540330/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37770910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-023-03528-w |
_version_ | 1785113691575812096 |
---|---|
author | Mathew, Don Seelam, Susmitha Bumrah, Karandeep Sherif, Akil Shrestha, Utsav |
author_facet | Mathew, Don Seelam, Susmitha Bumrah, Karandeep Sherif, Akil Shrestha, Utsav |
author_sort | Mathew, Don |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing systemic thrombolysis to anticoagulation in intermediate risk pulmonary embolism (PE) have yielded mixed results. A prior meta-analysis on this topic had included studies that used lower than standard dose of thrombolytics and included thrombolytic agents that are no longer available. Hence, interpreting the findings of that paper is not valid in contemporary practice. OBJECTIVES: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytic agents vs anticoagulation in intermediate risk PE. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials were included in the study. We did not find any difference in in-hospital mortality (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.42–1.50; I(2): 0) or risk of major bleeding (RR:2.08;95% CI: 0.98–4.42; I(2): 23.9%) between systemic thrombolysis and anticoagulation. Systemic thrombolysis was associated with lower risks for vasopressor use (RR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.11–0.64, I(2): 0) and secondary/rescue thrombolysis (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.14–0.45; I(2): 0). But systemic thrombolysis was found to have an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage (RR: 4.55; 95% CI: 1.30–15.91; I(2):0). There was no difference in mechanical ventilation between the two groups (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.31–1.19, I(2):0). CONCLUSION: In our meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic thrombolysis vs anticoagulation in intermediate risk PE, we did not find any difference in in-hospital mortality or overall risk of major bleeding. With systemic thrombolysis, we found lower risks for vasopressor use and need for secondary/ rescue thrombolysis and an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-023-03528-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10540330 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105403302023-09-30 Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis Mathew, Don Seelam, Susmitha Bumrah, Karandeep Sherif, Akil Shrestha, Utsav BMC Cardiovasc Disord Research BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing systemic thrombolysis to anticoagulation in intermediate risk pulmonary embolism (PE) have yielded mixed results. A prior meta-analysis on this topic had included studies that used lower than standard dose of thrombolytics and included thrombolytic agents that are no longer available. Hence, interpreting the findings of that paper is not valid in contemporary practice. OBJECTIVES: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytic agents vs anticoagulation in intermediate risk PE. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials were included in the study. We did not find any difference in in-hospital mortality (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.42–1.50; I(2): 0) or risk of major bleeding (RR:2.08;95% CI: 0.98–4.42; I(2): 23.9%) between systemic thrombolysis and anticoagulation. Systemic thrombolysis was associated with lower risks for vasopressor use (RR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.11–0.64, I(2): 0) and secondary/rescue thrombolysis (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.14–0.45; I(2): 0). But systemic thrombolysis was found to have an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage (RR: 4.55; 95% CI: 1.30–15.91; I(2):0). There was no difference in mechanical ventilation between the two groups (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.31–1.19, I(2):0). CONCLUSION: In our meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of systemic thrombolysis vs anticoagulation in intermediate risk PE, we did not find any difference in in-hospital mortality or overall risk of major bleeding. With systemic thrombolysis, we found lower risks for vasopressor use and need for secondary/ rescue thrombolysis and an increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-023-03528-w. BioMed Central 2023-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10540330/ /pubmed/37770910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-023-03528-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Mathew, Don Seelam, Susmitha Bumrah, Karandeep Sherif, Akil Shrestha, Utsav Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | systemic thrombolysis with newer thrombolytics vs anticoagulation in acute intermediate risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10540330/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37770910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-023-03528-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mathewdon systemicthrombolysiswithnewerthrombolyticsvsanticoagulationinacuteintermediateriskpulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT seelamsusmitha systemicthrombolysiswithnewerthrombolyticsvsanticoagulationinacuteintermediateriskpulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT bumrahkarandeep systemicthrombolysiswithnewerthrombolyticsvsanticoagulationinacuteintermediateriskpulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sherifakil systemicthrombolysiswithnewerthrombolyticsvsanticoagulationinacuteintermediateriskpulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shresthautsav systemicthrombolysiswithnewerthrombolyticsvsanticoagulationinacuteintermediateriskpulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |