4.5 Article

Saddle pulmonary embolism diagnosed by CT angiography: Frequency, clinical features and outcome

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
卷 101, 期 7, 页码 1537-1542

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2006.12.010

关键词

pulmonary embolism; computed tomographic angiography; mortality

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To assess the frequency, clinical presentation and outcome associated with saddle pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosed by computed tomographic angiography (CTA). Patients: Retrospective review of 546 consecutive patients diagnosed to have acute PE by CTA from 1 September 2002 to 31 December 2003. Results: Fourteen of 546 patients (2.6%) had saddle PE; 10 were men (71%). None of these patients had pre-existing cardiopulmonary disease. Most common presenting symptoms included dyspnea (72%) and syncope (43%). Hypotension was documented in 2 patients (14%). The most common risk factor for PE was obesity (64%). CTA revealed saddle PE and additional filling defects in the main pulmonary arteries in all patients. Echocardiography was performed within 48 h of the PE diagnosis in 10 patients and revealed right ventricular dysfunction in 8 (80%). All patients were initially managed in the hospital, median length of stay of 4 days (range, 1-45 days). Standard anticoagulant therapy with heparin and warfarin was administered to all patients. Five patients (36%) received additional therapy; thrombolytic therapy was administered to 1 patient (7%) and 4 patients (29%) received an inferior vena cava filter. None of the patients died during their hospitalization. Four patients (29%) died following their hospitalization after intervals of 1, 5, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Causes of death were known in 3 patients, all of whom died from progressive malignancy. Conclusion: Saddle PE in patients without pre-existing cardiopulmonary disease is associated with a relatively tow in-hospital mortality rate and may not necessitate aggressive medical management. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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