Comparing upfront catheter-based thrombectomy with alternative treatment strategies for clot-in-transit.

Abstract

Clot-in-transit (CIT) is associated with high mortality, and optimal treatment strategies remain uncertain. This study compares the efficacy of catheter-based thrombectomy (CBT) with other treatments for CIT, including anticoagulation, systemic thrombolytic (ST) therapy, and surgical thrombectomy. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with CIT documented on echocardiography between January 2020 and May 2024, managed with urgent upfront CBT. We compared the all-cause mortality rates of the CBT cohort to performance goal rates for anticoagulation, systemic thrombolysis (ST), and surgical thrombectomy from a published meta-analysis. Our cohort included 26 patients who underwent CBT (mean age 59.3 ± 17.9 years, 42.3% women, 57.7% Black). Compared to 463 patients from the meta-analysis receiving alternative treatments, the CBT group's short-term mortality was significantly lower (7.7% vs 32.4% for anticoagulation, 13.8% for ST, and 23.2% for surgical thrombectomy). CBT demonstrated noninferiority to anticoagulation (P < .001), ST (P = .031) and surgical thrombectomy (P < .001), and was superior to anticoagulation (P = .0056) and surgical thrombectomy (P = .036). This study suggests CBT is a promising treatment for CIT. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings.