4.6 Article

Case report: AngioJet thrombectomy with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for acute massive pulmonary embolism in a severe multiple trauma patient

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.989613

关键词

acute pulmonary embolism; AngioJet thrombectomy system; catheter-assisted embolectomy; fragmentation techniques; ECMO

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This case study examines a severe multiple trauma patient who experienced sudden massive pulmonary embolism and unstable hemodynamic status. After undergoing AngioJet catheter embolectomy and ECMO treatment, the patient's condition improved with the clearance of pulmonary embolism.
Acute massive pulmonary embolism (PE) is one of the main leading causes of high cardiovascular mortality, and the prognosis strongly varies, depending on the severity of pulmonary arterial obstruction and its impact on the RV function. Alternative therapy approaches comprise systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed thrombolysis, catheter embolectomy, catheter-assisted fragmentation techniques, and surgical thrombectomy. The following case study explores a 72-year-old man with severe multiple trauma who suffered from a sudden massive pulmonary embolism and presented with an unstable hemodynamic status. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has amply proven its efficacy in supplying cardiopulmonary assistance for this patient shocked by a massive PE with contraindication for thrombolysis. AngioJet catheter embolectomy and ECMO were performed, which finally cleared the massive pulmonary embolism away and improved the patient's hemodynamic status. The use of ECMO was continued during the weaning program, on the fifth day after ECMO decannulation, the patient was extubated and transferred to a local hospital for further recuperation. This case highlights that the AngioJet thrombectomy with the combination use of ECMO may be a potential choice of treatment for unstable PE patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据