International journal of cardiology · 2020
Impact of concomitant deep or superficial venous thrombosis of the legs on survival of patients with pulmonary embolism.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Keller Karsten, Hobohm Lukas, Münzel Thomas, Ostad Mir A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a frequent cause of death and morbidity. A few studies suggest that clot burden in pulmonary artery bed is related to PE patients' survival, but the impact of concomitant deep venous thrombosis and/or thrombophlebitis (DVT) on short-term survival of PE patients remains unclear. Thus, we aimed to investigate the impact of DVT on adverse outcomes in PE patients.
METHODS: Patients of the nationwide inpatient sample with PE (ICD-code I26) were stratified for DVT (ICD-code I80) and compared for patient characteristics, risk stratification markers, treatments and outcomes. Impact of concomitant DVT on adverse in-hospital outcomes was tested.
RESULTS: Overall, 346,586 PE patients (53.3% females) were included in this analysis. Among these, in 126,477 (36.5%) DVT was coded. PE patients with DVT were younger, less often of female sex and VTE risk-factors (surgery, cancer) as well as cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases were less prevalent compared with isolated PE. PE patients with DVT showed a significant better survival (5.4% vs. 20.2%, P < .001) and lower adverse in-hospital event rate (9.7% vs. 27.4%, P < .001) compared to patients with isolated PE. Lower risk for in-hospital mortality (OR 0.238 [95%CI 0.232-0.245], P < .001) and adverse in-hospital events (OR 0.302 [95%CI 0.295-0.309], P < .001) were respectively independent of age, gender, comorbidities and reperfusion-treatments.
CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant DVT affects survival of PE patients. Patients with an isolated PE had higher rate of in-hospital mortality and adverse in-hospital events. Our data suggest, that peripheral thrombus burden in PE with concomitant DVT might be less harmful in comparison to isolated PE with a probably larger thrombus burden.
METHODS: Patients of the nationwide inpatient sample with PE (ICD-code I26) were stratified for DVT (ICD-code I80) and compared for patient characteristics, risk stratification markers, treatments and outcomes. Impact of concomitant DVT on adverse in-hospital outcomes was tested.
RESULTS: Overall, 346,586 PE patients (53.3% females) were included in this analysis. Among these, in 126,477 (36.5%) DVT was coded. PE patients with DVT were younger, less often of female sex and VTE risk-factors (surgery, cancer) as well as cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases were less prevalent compared with isolated PE. PE patients with DVT showed a significant better survival (5.4% vs. 20.2%, P < .001) and lower adverse in-hospital event rate (9.7% vs. 27.4%, P < .001) compared to patients with isolated PE. Lower risk for in-hospital mortality (OR 0.238 [95%CI 0.232-0.245], P < .001) and adverse in-hospital events (OR 0.302 [95%CI 0.295-0.309], P < .001) were respectively independent of age, gender, comorbidities and reperfusion-treatments.
CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant DVT affects survival of PE patients. Patients with an isolated PE had higher rate of in-hospital mortality and adverse in-hospital events. Our data suggest, that peripheral thrombus burden in PE with concomitant DVT might be less harmful in comparison to isolated PE with a probably larger thrombus burden.