Comparison of Large-Bore Thrombectomy With Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for the Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism

BackgroundThere is significant debate on whether large-bore thrombectomy (LBT) or catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) is superior for the treatment of intermediate- and high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) while employing an early invasive strategy through endovascular therapies.MethodsBetween 2018 and 2021, 147 patients who presented to our institution with acute intermediate- or high-risk PE and had undergone PE Response Team-guided endovascular intervention with either LBT (Inari FlowTriever) or CDT (EKOSonic) were retrospectively reviewed. Data on the patients' clinical characteristics, comorbidities, serum biomarkers, hemodynamics, and imaging characteristics were obtained. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; the secondary outcomes were all-cause readmission, readmission for PE, and length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital. The safety outcome of procedure-related bleeding was evaluated. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate the cumulative event rate. Multivariate Cox-proportional hazard regression and inverse propensity weighting were used to adjust for confounders.ResultsThe median age of the patients was 63 (IQR, 53-73) years, and 48.3% of the patients were women. Patients in the LBT group had a higher PE Severity Index score (LBT vs CDT: median, 132 vs 108; P = .015) and greater prevalence of malignancy (LBT vs CDT: median, 22.7% vs 6%; P = .011). After propensity matching for baseline characteristics, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (LBT vs CDT: median, 15.8% vs 9.1%; hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.21-1.98; P = .442) for up to 1 year. The secondary outcomes or safety end points were also similar between the 2 interventions. An exploratory analysis showed elevated PE Severity Index scores, lower systolic blood pressures, and higher lactic acid levels to be associated with an increased risk of early death at 30 days.ConclusionsIn this retrospective cohort study, there was no significant difference in the cumulative event rate of all-cause mortality between LBT and CDT. Further studies are needed to evaluate the use of LBT versus CDT versus noninvasive therapy to understand outcomes and appropriate patient selection among those with intermediate- and high-risk PE.