Key result
Conservative anticoagulation resolves symptoms and achieves 3-month survival in two high-risk massive PE cases.
Why the study?
High-risk pulmonary embolism carries high mortality, and guidelines cannot always be implemented optimally, leading to the use of conservative treatment.
Does conservative treatment with anticoagulants improve outcomes in patients with high-risk massive pulmonary embolism who refuse or cannot undergo thrombolytic therapy or intervention?
Case Report (n=2)
Does conservative treatment with anticoagulants improve outcomes in patients with high-risk massive pulmonary embolism who refuse or cannot undergo thrombolytic therapy or intervention?
Conservative treatment with anticoagulants may be a viable management strategy for high-risk massive pulmonary embolism when thrombolytic therapy or surgical intervention is unavailable or refused.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Conservative anticoagulation may merit consideration when intervention is refused in high-risk PE; leaves open need for prospective data.
Rationale: Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is the most serious complication of venous thromboembolism. A high-risk PE is associated with high mortality as it may manifest as shock. Although there is a guideline, sometimes it cannot be implemented optimally. Therefore, conservative treatment is given. In this article, we report 2 cases of high-risk PE treated conservatively with anticoagulants. Patient concerns: In the first case, a 54-year-old woman presented with a chief complaint of sudden dyspnea. She had a history of open left supracondylus femur fracture. In the second case, a 53-year-old woman presented with chief complaints of sudden dyspnea and atypical right sided chest pain. She had a history of neglected right collum femur fracture. Diagnoses: Diagnosis of PE was made in both cases based on the results from electrocardiogram, chest X-ray, and echocardiography evaluation. In addition, computed tomography pulmonary angiography was also performed in the first case. Interventions: Conservative treatment with anticoagulant was chosen because of limited resources for surgery or intervention since both patients refused thrombolytic therapy and refused to be referred. Outcomes: The symptoms of both patients were resolved, and the clinical condition was improved. Imaging evaluation with TEE and duplex ultrasound 1 week later showed good results. Follow-up 3 months afterwards showed that both patients were alive and well without any complaints. Lessons: Acute PE with high-risk condition is life-threatening, that is sometimes difficult to diagnose as it varies in clinical symptoms. Sudden onset dyspnea with signs of shock indicates higher mortality. Echocardiography and computed tomography pulmonary angigraphy evaluation are reliable tools for diagnosis. With Conservative treatment using anticoagulant and routine follow up, patients with acute PE can be managed well.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hasibuan et al. (2021) conducted a case report in High-risk massive pulmonary embolism (n=2). Conservative treatment with anticoagulants was evaluated on Symptom resolution and survival. Conservative treatment with anticoagulants successfully resolved symptoms and resulted in 3-month survival in two patients with high-risk massive pulmonary embolism.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: