• Jianwen Fei, Yan Tang, Jinxiang Wu, Lijun Kang, Jiping Zhao, Hong Dai, Wenxiang Bi, Junfei Wang, Fen Liu, Wen Liu, Meng Yang, and Liang Dong.
• Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, P.R. China ; Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Yantai Shan Hospital, Yantai, Shandong 264001, P.R. China.
• Exp Ther Med. 2014 Jan 1; 7 (1): 103-108.

AbstractThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of thrombolytic and anticoagulant therapy for acute submassive pulmonary embolism (PE). A retrospective evaluation was performed on 25 consecutive inpatients with acute submassive PE treated by thrombolytic therapy and 25 earlier consecutive inpatients with acute submassive PE treated by anticoagulant therapy. No statistically significant difference in clinical curative effect was identified between the thrombolysis and anticoagulation groups (P>0.05). Following 24 h of therapy, the improvement rates of dyspnea and revascularization in the thrombolysis group achieved statistical significance compared with those of the anticoagulation group (P<0.01 for each). The PO2 level of the thrombolysis group (81.18±5.66 mmHg) was notably higher than that of the anticoagulation group and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.01). The pulmonary arterial pressures of the thrombolysis group (51.21±6.86 mmHg) were significantly lower than those of the anticoagulation group (60.64±5.17 mmHg) (P<0.01). Furthermore, the difference between the hemorrhage rates of the two groups was statistically significant (P<0.05). Thrombolysis was shown to rapidly relieve dyspnea, reduce pulmonary arterial pressure and revascularize the embolized blood vessels. However, the hemorrhage rate of the thrombolysis group was higher than that of the anticoagulation group. The overall efficacies and fatality rates of the thrombolysis and anticoagulation groups were similar.

4 keywords...

hide…