4.6 Article

Outcome of pulmonary endarterectomy in symptomatic chronic thromboembolic disease

Journal

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
Volume 44, Issue 6, Pages 1635-1645

Publisher

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00050114

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chronic thromboembolic disease is characterised by persistent pulmonary thromboembolic occlusions without pulmonary hypertension. Early surgical treatment with pulmonary endarterectomy may improve symptoms and prevent disease progression. We sought to assess the outcome of pulmonary endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with chronic thromboembolic disease. Patients with symptomatic chronic thromboembolic disease and a mean pulmonary artery pressure <25 mmHg at baseline with right heart catheterisation and treated with pulmonary endarterectomy between January 2000 and July 2013 were identified. Patients were reassessed at 6 months and at 1 year following surgery. A total of 42 patients underwent surgery and the median length of stay in hospital was 11 days. There was no in-hospital mortality but complications occurred in 40% of patients. At 1 year, following surgery, 95% of the patients remained alive. There was a significant symptomatic improvement with 95% of patients in the New York Heart Association functional classes I or II at 6 months. There was a significant improvement in quality of life assessed by the Cambridge pulmonary hypertension outcome review questionnaire. In this carefully selected cohort of chronic thromboembolic disease patients, pulmonary endarterectomy resulted in significant improvement in symptoms and quality of life. Appropriate patient selection is paramount given the known surgical morbidity and mortality, and surgery should only be performed in expert centres.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available