Saddle Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with Cancer in the Era of Incidental Events: Clinical Findings and Outcomes in a Single Centre Cohort

M. Aramberri, M. Benegas, M. Sánchez, D. Muñoz-Guglielmetti, C. Zamora, A. García-Villa, C. Díaz-Pedroche, C. Font
{"title":"Saddle Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with Cancer in the Era of Incidental Events: Clinical Findings and Outcomes in a Single Centre Cohort","authors":"M. Aramberri, M. Benegas, M. Sánchez, D. Muñoz-Guglielmetti, C. Zamora, A. García-Villa, C. Díaz-Pedroche, C. Font","doi":"10.1055/a-1897-7061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background  There is scarce information regarding the prevalence and clinical impact of saddle pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with cancer. Objectives  This study aimed to assess the prevalence, clinical findings, and short-term outcomes of patients with cancer-related saddle PE including acute symptomatic and unsuspected events. Patients/Methods  Consecutive patients with cancer-related PE (March 1, 2006–October 31, 2014) were retrospectively reviewed by a chest radiologist to assess PE burden and signs of right ventricular (RV) overload. The clinical outcomes within 30 days were evaluated according to saddle versus nonsaddle PE. Results  Thirty-six (12%) out of 289 patients with newly diagnosed cancer-related PE presented with saddle PE. Saddle PE was found in 21 cases (58%) with acute symptomatic PE and the remaining 15 cases (42%) were found as unsuspected findings. Patients with saddle PE had more frequently experienced a previous thrombotic event (31 vs. 13%; p  = 0.008), and it occurred more frequently as an acute symptomatic event (58 vs. 39%; p  = 0.025) compared with those with nonsaddle PE. Signs of RV overload including RV/left ventricle ratio ≥1 (22 vs. 4%; p  < 0.001) and interventricular septum displacement (53 vs. 20%; p  < 0.001) were also more common in patients with saddle PE compared with nonsaddle PE. Overall, PE-related mortality, venous thromboembolism recurrence, and major bleeding within 30 days were found to be similar according to saddle versus nonsaddle PE. Conclusion  Saddle PE is not uncommon in patients with cancer-related PE including in those with unsuspected PE. Similar 30-day outcomes were found according to saddle versus nonsaddle PE in our cohort.","PeriodicalId":94220,"journal":{"name":"TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1897-7061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background  There is scarce information regarding the prevalence and clinical impact of saddle pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with cancer. Objectives  This study aimed to assess the prevalence, clinical findings, and short-term outcomes of patients with cancer-related saddle PE including acute symptomatic and unsuspected events. Patients/Methods  Consecutive patients with cancer-related PE (March 1, 2006–October 31, 2014) were retrospectively reviewed by a chest radiologist to assess PE burden and signs of right ventricular (RV) overload. The clinical outcomes within 30 days were evaluated according to saddle versus nonsaddle PE. Results  Thirty-six (12%) out of 289 patients with newly diagnosed cancer-related PE presented with saddle PE. Saddle PE was found in 21 cases (58%) with acute symptomatic PE and the remaining 15 cases (42%) were found as unsuspected findings. Patients with saddle PE had more frequently experienced a previous thrombotic event (31 vs. 13%; p  = 0.008), and it occurred more frequently as an acute symptomatic event (58 vs. 39%; p  = 0.025) compared with those with nonsaddle PE. Signs of RV overload including RV/left ventricle ratio ≥1 (22 vs. 4%; p  < 0.001) and interventricular septum displacement (53 vs. 20%; p  < 0.001) were also more common in patients with saddle PE compared with nonsaddle PE. Overall, PE-related mortality, venous thromboembolism recurrence, and major bleeding within 30 days were found to be similar according to saddle versus nonsaddle PE. Conclusion  Saddle PE is not uncommon in patients with cancer-related PE including in those with unsuspected PE. Similar 30-day outcomes were found according to saddle versus nonsaddle PE in our cohort.
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
偶发事件时代癌症患者的鞍状肺栓塞:单中心队列的临床发现和结果
关于鞍状肺栓塞(PE)在癌症患者中的患病率和临床影响的信息很少。本研究旨在评估癌症相关鞍型PE患者的患病率、临床表现和短期预后,包括急性症状和未预料到的事件。患者/方法由一位胸部放射科医生对连续的癌症相关PE患者(2006年3月1日至2014年10月31日)进行回顾性分析,以评估PE负担和右心室(RV)负荷过重的迹象。根据鞍座与非鞍座PE对30天内的临床结果进行评估。结果289例新诊断的癌症相关PE患者中有36例(12%)表现为鞍型PE。急性症状性PE 21例(58%)发现鞍型PE,其余15例(42%)未发现。鞍型PE患者既往血栓事件发生率更高(31% vs. 13%;P = 0.008),并且作为急性症状事件发生的频率更高(58 vs 39%;p = 0.025)。右心室超载的迹象包括左心室/左心室比值≥1 (22 vs. 4%;P < 0.001)和室间隔移位(53 vs. 20%;p < 0.001)与非鞍座PE相比,鞍座PE患者更常见。总体而言,根据鞍座PE与非鞍座PE,发现PE相关死亡率、静脉血栓栓塞复发和30天内大出血相似。结论鞍型PE在癌症相关PE患者中并不少见,包括未确诊的PE。在我们的队列中,鞍座PE与非鞍座PE的30天结果相似。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Management of Therapeutic-intensity Unfractionated Heparin: A Narrative Review on Critical Points. Impact of Clinical Decision Support with Mandatory versus Voluntary Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment in Hospitalized Patients. An Intestinal Microbiome Intervention Affects Biochemical Disease Activity in Patients with Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Corrigendum: Bleeding Risk Prediction in Patients Treated with Antithrombotic Drugs According to the Anatomic Site of Bleeding, Indication for Treatment, and Time Since Treatment Initiation. Establishing Expectancy Values for Fibrin Monomer in Uncomplicated Pregnancy.
×
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:481959085
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