Clinical importance of the distribution of pulmonary artery embolism in acute pulmonary embolism

5Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: To explore the clinical importance of the distribution of pulmonary artery embolism in acute pulmonary embolism (APE). Methods: Sixty-four patients with APE were classified into mixed-type and distal-type pulmonary embolism groups. Their right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) and disease duration were recorded, and the diameter of their right ventricles was measured by ultrasound. The computed tomography angiographic clot load was determined as a Mastora score. Results: Patients with distal-type pulmonary embolisms had significantly lower RVSPs (44.92 ± 17.04 vs 55.69 ± 17.66 mmHg), and significantly smaller right ventricular diameters (21.08 ± 3.06 vs 23.37 ± 3.48 mm) than those with mixed-type pulmonary embolisms. Additionally, disease duration was significantly longer in patients with distal-type pulmonary embolisms (14.33 ± 11.57 vs 8.10 ± 7.10 days), and they had significantly lower Mastora scores (20.91% ± 18.92% vs 43.96% ± 18.30%) than patients with mixed-type pulmonary embolisms. After treatment, RVSPs decreased significantly in patients with both distal-type and mixed-type pulmonary embolisms. Right ventricle diameters also decreased significantly in patients with mixed-type pulmonary embolisms after treatment. Conclusion: Patients with mixed-type pulmonary embolisms are significantly more susceptible to pulmonary hypertension, enlarged right ventricular diameters, and shorter durations of disease than those with distal-type pulmonary embolisms. The distribution of pulmonary artery embolism in APE can provide a clinical reference.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nie, Y., Sun, L., Long, W., LV, X., Li, C., Wang, H., … Guo, M. (2021). Clinical importance of the distribution of pulmonary artery embolism in acute pulmonary embolism. Journal of International Medical Research, 49(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605211004769

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free