Management of high-risk acute pulmonary embolism: an emulated target trial analysis

IF 21.2 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Intensive Care Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-25 DOI:10.1007/s00134-025-07805-4
Andrea Stadlbauer, Tom Verbelen, Leonhard Binzenhöfer, Tomaz Goslar, Alexander Supady, Peter M. Spieth, Marko Noc, Andreas Verstraete, Sabine Hoffmann, Michael Schomaker, Julia Höpler, Marie Kraft, Esther Tautz, Daniel Hoyer, Jörn Tongers, Franz Haertel, Aschraf El-Essawi, Mostafa Salem, Rafael Henrique Rangel, Carsten Hullermann, Marvin Kriz, Benedikt Schrage, Jorge Moisés, Manel Sabate, Federico Pappalardo, Lisa Crusius, Norman Mangner, Christoph Adler, Tobias Tichelbäcker, Carsten Skurk, Christian Jung, Sebastian Kufner, Tobias Graf, Clemens Scherer, Laura Villegas Sierra, Hannah Billig, Nicolas Majunke, Walter S. Speidl, Robert Zilberszac, Luis Chiscano-Camón, Aitor Uribarri, Jordi Riera, Roberto Roncon-Albuquerque, Elizabete Terauda, Andrejs Erglis, Guido Tavazzi, Uwe Zeymer, Maike Knorr, Juliane Kilo, Sven Möbius-Winkler, Robert H. G. Schwinger, Derk Frank, Oliver Borst, Helene Häberle, Frederic De Roeck, Christiaan Vrints, Christof Schmid, Georg Nickenig, Christian Hag..
{"title":"Management of high-risk acute pulmonary embolism: an emulated target trial analysis","authors":"Andrea Stadlbauer, Tom Verbelen, Leonhard Binzenhöfer, Tomaz Goslar, Alexander Supady, Peter M. Spieth, Marko Noc, Andreas Verstraete, Sabine Hoffmann, Michael Schomaker, Julia Höpler, Marie Kraft, Esther Tautz, Daniel Hoyer, Jörn Tongers, Franz Haertel, Aschraf El-Essawi, Mostafa Salem, Rafael Henrique Rangel, Carsten Hullermann, Marvin Kriz, Benedikt Schrage, Jorge Moisés, Manel Sabate, Federico Pappalardo, Lisa Crusius, Norman Mangner, Christoph Adler, Tobias Tichelbäcker, Carsten Skurk, Christian Jung, Sebastian Kufner, Tobias Graf, Clemens Scherer, Laura Villegas Sierra, Hannah Billig, Nicolas Majunke, Walter S. Speidl, Robert Zilberszac, Luis Chiscano-Camón, Aitor Uribarri, Jordi Riera, Roberto Roncon-Albuquerque, Elizabete Terauda, Andrejs Erglis, Guido Tavazzi, Uwe Zeymer, Maike Knorr, Juliane Kilo, Sven Möbius-Winkler, Robert H. G. Schwinger, Derk Frank, Oliver Borst, Helene Häberle, Frederic De Roeck, Christiaan Vrints, Christof Schmid, Georg Nickenig, Christian Hag..","doi":"10.1007/s00134-025-07805-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>High-risk acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening condition necessitating hemodynamic stabilization and rapid restoration of pulmonary perfusion. In this context, evidence regarding the benefit of advanced circulatory support and pulmonary recanalization strategies is still limited.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>In this observational study, we assessed data of 1060 patients treated for high-risk acute PE with 991 being included in a target trial emulation to investigate all-cause in-hospital mortality estimates with different advanced treatment strategies. The four treatment groups consisted of patients undergoing (I) veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) alone (<i>n</i> = 126), (II) intrahospital systemic thrombolysis (SYS) (<i>n</i> = 643), (III) surgical thrombectomy (ST) (<i>n</i> = 49), and (IV) percutaneous catheter-directed treatment (PCDT) (<i>n</i> = 173). VA-ECMO was allowed as bridging to pulmonary recanalization in groups II, III, and IV. Marginal causal contrasts were estimated using the g-formula with logistic regression models as the primary approach. Sensitivity analyses included targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) with machine learning, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), as well as variations of estimands, handling of missing values, and a complete target trial emulation excluding the VA-ECMO alone group.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>In the overall target trial population, the median age was 62.0 years, and 53.3% of patients were male. The estimated probability of in-hospital mortality from the primary target trial intention-to-treat analysis for VA-ECMO alone was 57% (95% confidence interval [CI] 47%; 67%), compared to 48% (95% CI 44%; 53%) for intrahospital SYS, 34% (95%CI 18%; 50%) for ST, and 43% (95% CI 35%; 51%) for PCDT. The mortality risk ratios were largely in favor of any advanced recanalization strategy over VA-ECMO alone. The robustness of these findings was supported by all sensitivity analyses. In the crude outcome analysis, patients surviving to discharge had a high probability of favorable neurologic outcome in all treatment groups.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Advanced recanalization by means of SYS, ST, and several promising catheter-directed systems may have a positive impact on short-term survival of patients presenting with high-risk PE compared to the use of VA-ECMO alone as a bridge to recovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":13665,"journal":{"name":"Intensive Care Medicine","volume":"209 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":21.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-025-07805-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

High-risk acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening condition necessitating hemodynamic stabilization and rapid restoration of pulmonary perfusion. In this context, evidence regarding the benefit of advanced circulatory support and pulmonary recanalization strategies is still limited.

Methods

In this observational study, we assessed data of 1060 patients treated for high-risk acute PE with 991 being included in a target trial emulation to investigate all-cause in-hospital mortality estimates with different advanced treatment strategies. The four treatment groups consisted of patients undergoing (I) veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) alone (n = 126), (II) intrahospital systemic thrombolysis (SYS) (n = 643), (III) surgical thrombectomy (ST) (n = 49), and (IV) percutaneous catheter-directed treatment (PCDT) (n = 173). VA-ECMO was allowed as bridging to pulmonary recanalization in groups II, III, and IV. Marginal causal contrasts were estimated using the g-formula with logistic regression models as the primary approach. Sensitivity analyses included targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) with machine learning, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), as well as variations of estimands, handling of missing values, and a complete target trial emulation excluding the VA-ECMO alone group.

Results

In the overall target trial population, the median age was 62.0 years, and 53.3% of patients were male. The estimated probability of in-hospital mortality from the primary target trial intention-to-treat analysis for VA-ECMO alone was 57% (95% confidence interval [CI] 47%; 67%), compared to 48% (95% CI 44%; 53%) for intrahospital SYS, 34% (95%CI 18%; 50%) for ST, and 43% (95% CI 35%; 51%) for PCDT. The mortality risk ratios were largely in favor of any advanced recanalization strategy over VA-ECMO alone. The robustness of these findings was supported by all sensitivity analyses. In the crude outcome analysis, patients surviving to discharge had a high probability of favorable neurologic outcome in all treatment groups.

Conclusion

Advanced recanalization by means of SYS, ST, and several promising catheter-directed systems may have a positive impact on short-term survival of patients presenting with high-risk PE compared to the use of VA-ECMO alone as a bridge to recovery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高危急性肺栓塞的治疗:模拟靶试验分析
高风险急性肺栓塞(PE)是一种危及生命的疾病,需要血流动力学稳定和快速恢复肺灌注。在这种情况下,关于先进的循环支持和肺再通策略的益处的证据仍然有限。方法在这项观察性研究中,我们评估了1060例高风险急性PE患者的数据,其中991例被纳入目标试验模拟,以调查不同晚期治疗策略下的全因住院死亡率估计。四组患者分别接受(I)静脉-动脉体外膜氧合(VA-ECMO)治疗(126例),(II)院内全身溶栓(SYS)治疗(643例),(III)手术取栓(ST)治疗(49例),(IV)经皮导管定向治疗(PCDT)治疗(173例)。在II、III和IV组中,允许VA-ECMO作为肺再通的桥接。使用g公式和逻辑回归模型作为主要方法来估计边际因果对比。敏感性分析包括机器学习的目标最大似然估计(TMLE),治疗加权逆概率(IPTW),以及估计的变化,缺失值的处理,以及排除VA-ECMO单独组的完整目标试验模拟。结果总目标试验人群中,年龄中位数为62.0岁,男性占53.3%。从主要目标试验意向-治疗分析得出的院内死亡率估计概率为57%(95%置信区间[CI] 47%;67%),而48% (95% CI 44%;53%)为院内SYS, 34% (95%CI 18%;50%)为ST, 43% (95% CI 35%;51%)用于PCDT。死亡率风险比在很大程度上有利于任何先进的再通策略,而不是单独的VA-ECMO。这些发现的稳健性得到了所有敏感性分析的支持。在粗结局分析中,存活至出院的患者在所有治疗组中都有很高的神经系统预后良好的可能性。结论:与单独使用VA-ECMO作为恢复的桥梁相比,采用SYS、ST和几种有前途的导管引导系统进行高级再通可能对高风险PE患者的短期生存有积极影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Intensive Care Medicine
Intensive Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
51.50
自引率
2.80%
发文量
326
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Intensive Care Medicine is the premier publication platform fostering the communication and exchange of cutting-edge research and ideas within the field of intensive care medicine on a comprehensive scale. Catering to professionals involved in intensive medical care, including intensivists, medical specialists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals, ICM stands as the official journal of The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. ICM is dedicated to advancing the understanding and practice of intensive care medicine among professionals in Europe and beyond. The journal provides a robust platform for disseminating current research findings and innovative ideas in intensive care medicine. Content published in Intensive Care Medicine encompasses a wide range, including review articles, original research papers, letters, reviews, debates, and more.
期刊最新文献
Early biomarker detection: fundamentally disputable? Authors' Reply. Critical care management of the patient with pharmaceutical poisoning: author's reply. Patient-ventilator asynchrony: physiological causes and clinical aspects. Publisher Correction: Weaning practices from veno-venous ECMO: the international ESICM-endorsed WEAN-ECMO survey Melatonin to prevent delirium in the ICU: revisiting the evidence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1