TY - JOUR
T1 - Management of high-risk acute pulmonary embolism
T2 - an emulated target trial analysis
AU - High-risk P. E. Investigator Group
AU - Stadlbauer, Andrea
AU - Verbelen, Tom
AU - Binzenhöfer, Leonhard
AU - Goslar, Tomaz
AU - Supady, Alexander
AU - Spieth, Peter M
AU - Noc, Marko
AU - Verstraete, Andreas
AU - Hoffmann, Sabine
AU - Schomaker, Michael
AU - Höpler, Julia
AU - Kraft, Marie
AU - Tautz, Esther
AU - Hoyer, Daniel
AU - Tongers, Jörn
AU - Haertel, Franz
AU - El-Essawi, Aschraf
AU - Salem, Mostafa
AU - Rangel, Rafael Henrique
AU - Hullermann, Carsten
AU - Kriz, Marvin
AU - Schrage, Benedikt
AU - Moisés, Jorge
AU - Sabate, Manel
AU - Pappalardo, Federico
AU - Crusius, Lisa
AU - Mangner, Norman
AU - Adler, Christoph
AU - Tichelbäcker, Tobias
AU - Skurk, Carsten
AU - Jung, Christian
AU - Kufner, Sebastian
AU - Graf, Tobias
AU - Scherer, Clemens
AU - Villegas Sierra, Laura
AU - Billig, Hannah
AU - Majunke, Nicolas
AU - Speidl, Walter S
AU - Zilberszac, Robert
AU - Chiscano-Camón, Luis
AU - Uribarri, Aitor
AU - Riera, Jordi
AU - Roncon-Albuquerque, Roberto
AU - Terauda, Elizabete
AU - Erglis, Andrejs
AU - Tavazzi, Guido
AU - Zeymer, Uwe
AU - Knorr, Maike
AU - Kilo, Juliane
AU - Thiele, Holger
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=86000032055&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/f4b3307c-a409-3e4c-a32d-0f7101f7bef3/
U2 - 10.1007/s00134-025-07805-4
DO - 10.1007/s00134-025-07805-4
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 39998658
SN - 0342-4642
JO - Intensive Care Medicine
JF - Intensive Care Medicine
M1 - 100548
ER -