Comparison of Safety and Efficacy of Aspiration Thrombectomy and Ultrasound Accelerated Thrombolysis for Management of Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) and ultrasound-accelerated thrombolysis (USAT) in pulmonary embolism (PE) management by performing a systematic review of the literature.

Materials and Methods

The PubMed database was searched to identify articles on Inari’s FlowTriever and Penumbra’s Indigo mechanical thrombectomy devices (Group A) and the Ekos Endovascular system (Group B). Outcomes variables analyzed include pre- and post-procedure RV/LV ratio, pre- and post-procedure pulmonary artery pressure, hospital length of stay, technical success, specific complications, and mortality rate. Mean values were calculated using the weighted mean approach. RevMan Version 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration) was used to perform the meta-analysis for this study. Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) approach was used to perform a quality assessment of the included articles in order to verify the validity and reliability of the research.

Results

27 studies were in Group A and 28 studies pertained to Group B. There were 1662 patients in Group A and 1273 patients in Group B. Both groups had similar technical success (99.6% vs 99.4%). Thrombectomy showed longer mean procedure time (73.03 ± 14.57 min vs 47.35 ± 3.15 min), lower mean blood loss (325.20 ± 69.15 mL vs 423.05 ± 64.95 mL), shorter mean ICU stay (2.35 ± 1.64 days vs 3.22 ± 1.27 days), and shorter mean overall hospital stay (6.94 ± 4.38 days vs 7.23 ± 2.31 days). EKOS showed greater mean change in Miller Index (9.05 ± 3.35 vs 4.91 ± 3.70) and greater mean change in pulmonary artery pressure (14.17 ± 6.35 mmHg vs 8.11 ± 4.39 mmHg).

Conclusion

Ultrasound accelerated thrombolysis and percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy are effective therapies for pulmonary embolism with comparable clinical outcomes.