...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis: JTH >Impact of the efficacy of thrombolytic therapy on the mortality of patients with acute submassive pulmonary embolism: A meta-analysis
【24h】

Impact of the efficacy of thrombolytic therapy on the mortality of patients with acute submassive pulmonary embolism: A meta-analysis

机译:溶栓治疗效果对急性亚大规模肺栓塞患者死亡率的影响:一项荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: The efficacy of thrombolytic therapy in patients with submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) remains unclear. Previous meta-analyses have not separately reported the proportion of patients with submassive PE. Objective: We assessed the effect of thrombolytic therapy on mortality, recurrent PE, clinical deterioration requiring treatment escalation and bleeding in patients with submassive PE. Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials comparing adjunctive thrombolytic therapy with heparin alone as initial treatments in patients with acute submassive PE, and reported 30-day mortality or in-hospital clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 1510 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. No significant differences were apparent in the composite endpoint of all-cause death or recurrent PE between the adjunctive thrombolytic therapy arm and the heparin-alone arm (3.1% vs. 5.4%; RR, 0.64 [0.32-1.28]; P = 0.2). Adjunctive thrombolytic therapy significantly reduced the incidence of the composite endpoint of all-cause death or clinical deterioration (3.9% vs. 9.4%; RR, 0.44; P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant associations for major bleeding when adjunctive thrombolytic therapy was compared with heparin therapy alone (6.6% vs. 1.9%; P = 0.2). Conclusions: This meta-analysis shows that adjunctive thrombolytic therapy does not significantly reduce the risk of mortality or recurrent PE in patients with acute submassive PE, but that adjuvant thrombolytic therapy prevents clinical deterioration requiring the escalation of treatment in patients with acute submassive PE. Bleeding risk assessment might be the most successful approach for improving clinical outcomes and patient-specific benefit.
机译:背景:溶栓治疗在亚大规模肺栓塞(PE)患者中的疗效尚不清楚。先前的荟萃分析尚未单独报告亚大规模PE患者的比例。目的:我们评估了溶栓疗法对亚大规模PE患者的死亡率,复发性PE,临床恶化,需要治疗升级和出血的影响。方法:检索MEDLINE,EMBASE和Cochrane库数据库,以鉴定所有将辅助溶栓治疗与单纯肝素作为急性亚大规模PE患者的初始治疗进行比较的所有相关随机对照试验,并报告30天死亡率或住院期间的临床结局。结果:本荟萃分析共纳入1510例患者。辅助溶栓治疗组和单纯肝素治疗组在全因死亡或复发性PE的复合终点方面无明显差异(3.1%vs. 5.4%; RR,0.64 [0.32-1.28]; P = 0.2) 。辅助溶栓治疗显着降低了全因死亡或临床恶化的复合终点的发生率(3.9%比9.4%; RR,0.44; P <0.001)。将辅助溶栓治疗与单纯肝素治疗进行比较时,大出血无统计学意义(6.6%vs. 1.9%; P = 0.2)。结论:这项荟萃分析表明,辅助性溶栓治疗并未显着降低急性亚大规模PE患者的死亡率或复发性PE的风险,但辅助溶栓治疗可防止临床恶化,而急性亚大规模PE患者需要逐步治疗。出血风险评估可能是改善临床结果和患者特定获益的最成功方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号