Taking people out of the danger zone, which is what submassive PE was thought to be, was a very good thing. That result, in and of itself, seemed to have value from numerous standpoints, especially given the concern at the time that submassive PE could deteriorate quickly into massive PE.
But, it was a very important study because it showed a positive result-the CDL group had faster right ventricular (RV) recovery than the group on anticoagulants alone. The fact that a 59-patient, non-United States, randomized controlled trial of ultrasound-assisted catheter-directed lysis (CDL) versus anticoagulation for acute intermediate-risk PE 1 took our small world by storm was an indication of how immature the data were at that time. Sista: We’re in a different place than we were 8 or 9 years ago. Sista, what is the state of the data on submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) currently?ĭr. Lewis Katz School of Medicine Philadelphia, O’Sullivan, MDĪssistant Professor, Interventional Radiology
0 kommentar(er)
