Key result
Thrombolysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation for acute pulmonary embolism may yield high efficacy, with survival rates potentially exceeding 50% in correctly identified patients.
Why the study?
Does thrombolysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation improve survival in patients with cardiac arrest caused by acute pulmonary embolism?
Does thrombolysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation improve survival in patients with cardiac arrest caused by acute pulmonary embolism?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The authors argue that guidelines for pulmonary embolism should address the use of thrombolysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation for PE-induced cardiac arrest.
particularly when the condition leading to the arrest was acute pulmonary embolism . . . '. 5 There is also pragmatic reason to analyse fibrinolysis in PE patients 'peri-CPR'. Some clinical characteristics can help to identify PE as the likely cause of cardiac arrest including: respiratory distress and altered mental status before the episode, age under 65, witnessed arrest, and the presence of pulseless electrical activity as the first rhythm. With such PE patients correctly identified, fibrinolytic efficacy might be very high, with survival rate over 50%. 7 In conclusion, PE may cause cardiac arrest, and such patients have been candidates for thrombolysis. This deserves elaboration in PE guidelines, as done in contemporary CPR guidelines, because thrombolysis has been the most important and challenging therapeutic decision in PE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Torbicki et al. (2008) conducted a letter in Pulmonary embolism causing cardiac arrest. Thrombolysis was evaluated on Survival. Thrombolysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation for acute pulmonary embolism may yield high efficacy, with survival rates potentially exceeding 50% in correctly identified patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: