Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
BACKGROUND: Clot-in-transit is associated with high mortality, but optimal management strategies remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies in patients with clot-in-transit. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients with documented clot-in-transit in the right heart on echocardiography across 2 institutions between January 2020 and October 2023. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic decompensation. RESULTS: Among 35 patients included in the study, 10 patients (28.6%) received anticoagulation alone and 2 patients (5.7%) received systemic thrombolysis, while 23 patients (65.7%) underwent catheter-based therapy (CBT; 22 mechanical thrombectomy and 1 catheter-directed thrombolysis). Over a median follow-up of 30 days, 9 patients (25.7%) experienced the primary composite outcome. Compared with anticoagulation alone, patients who received CBT or systemic thrombolysis had significantly lower rates of the primary composite outcome (12% versus 60%; log-rank P <0.001; hazard ratio, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.03–0.54]; P =0.005) including a lower rate of death (8% versus 50%; hazard ratio, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.02–0.55]; P =0.008), resuscitated cardiac arrest (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01–1.15]; P =0.067), or hemodynamic deterioration (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01–1.15]; P =0.067). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of CBT in patients with clot-in-transit, CBT or systemic thrombolysis was associated with a significantly lower rate of adverse clinical outcomes, including a lower rate of death compared with anticoagulation alone driven by the CBT group. CBT has the potential to improve outcomes. Further large-scale studies are needed to test these associations.
BACKGROUND: Clot-in-transit is associated with high mortality, but optimal management strategies remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies in patients with clot-in-transit. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients with documented clot-in-transit in the right heart on echocardiography across 2 institutions between January 2020 and October 2023. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic decompensation. RESULTS: Among 35 patients included in the study, 10 patients (28.6%) received anticoagulation alone and 2 patients (5.7%) received systemic thrombolysis, while 23 patients (65.7%) underwent catheter-based therapy (CBT; 22 mechanical thrombectomy and 1 catheter-directed thrombolysis). Over a median follow-up of 30 days, 9 patients (25.7%) experienced the primary composite outcome. Compared with anticoagulation alone, patients who received CBT or systemic thrombolysis had significantly lower rates of the primary composite outcome (12% versus 60%; log-rank P <0.001; hazard ratio, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.03–0.54]; P =0.005) including a lower rate of death (8% versus 50%; hazard ratio, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.02–0.55]; P =0.008), resuscitated cardiac arrest (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01–1.15]; P =0.067), or hemodynamic deterioration (4% versus 30%; hazard ratio, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01–1.15]; P =0.067). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of CBT in patients with clot-in-transit, CBT or systemic thrombolysis was associated with a significantly lower rate of adverse clinical outcomes, including a lower rate of death compared with anticoagulation alone driven by the CBT group. CBT has the potential to improve outcomes. Further large-scale studies are needed to test these associations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.