Quantitative Flow Ratio and Virtual Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Serial Coronary Stenoses: Attractive Technology, But Still Crawling.

Abstract

Objectives
To evaluate the clinical care provided to cancer patients hospitalized for acute pulmonary embolism (PE), as well as the association between type of cancer, in-hospital care, and clinical outcomes.
Methods
This study examined the in-hospital care (systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed thrombolysis, and surgical thrombectomy/embolectomy) and clinical outcomes (mortality, major bleeding, and hemorrhagic stroke) among adults hospitalized due to acute PE between October 2015 to December 2018 using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI).
Results
Of 1,090,130 hospital records included in the analysis, 216,825 (19.9%) had current cancer diagnoses, including lung (4.7%), hematological (2.5%), colorectal (1.6%), breast (1.3%), prostate (0.8%), and ‘other’ cancer (9.0%). Cancer patients had lower adjusted odds of receiving systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed therapy, and surgical thrombectomy/embolectomy compared with their non-cancer counterparts (P < 0.001), except for systemic thrombolysis (aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85–1.09, P = 0.553) and catheter-directed therapy (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67–1.00, P = 0.053) for prostate cancer. Cancer patients had greater odds of mortality (P < 0.05). Lung cancer patients had the highest odds of mortality (aOR 2.68, 95% CI 2.61–2.76, P < 0.001) and hemorrhagic stroke (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.61–1.90, P < 0.001), while colorectal cancer patients had the greatest odds of bleeding (aOR 2.04, 95% CI 1.94–2.15, P < 0.001).
Conclusion
Among those hospitalized for PE, cancer diagnoses were associated with lower odds of invasive management and poorer in-hospital outcomes, with metastatic status being an especially important determinant. Appropriateness of care could not be assessed in this study.