Ahmad, Sumera R

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a leading cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Systemic thrombolysis is recommended for high-risk PE, but risk of major bleeding limits its use despite its efficacy. While mechanical thrombectomy (MT) has emerged as an alternative reperfusion strategy, real-world safety data remains limited. The objective of this single-center retrospective observational cohort study was to characterize the safety profile and procedural complications of MT. Methods Adult patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk PE who underwent MT at a quaternary academic medical center between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2024, were included. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, imaging, procedural, outcome, and mortality data were collected. Major adverse events and bleeding were defined according to established criteria. Results From a total of 103 screened patients, 65 were included. Of these, 22 (34%) were classified as high-risk and 43 (66%) as intermediate-risk. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. High-risk patients demonstrated greater clinical disease severity, with higher mean Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) scores (188.5 vs 122.4). Clinical deterioration prior to MT occurred in 35% of intermediate-risk patients. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) consultation rate (32% vs 7%), peri-procedural ECMO use (18% vs 2.3%), major bleeding (27% vs 4.7%), and in-hospital mortality (36% vs 11.6%) were higher in the high-risk group. Thrombus removal was achieved in 77% and 88% of high- and intermediate-risk patients, respectively. High-risk patients had longer ICU (mean 4 vs 1.3 days) and hospital stays (mean 21.5 vs 6.4 days), higher thirty-day mortality (36% vs 14%), and lower 90-day survival (59% vs 79%). Conclusions MT achieved high rates of thrombus removal in both groups. In this retrospective cohort, high-risk patients had greater baseline clinical severity and was associated with higher bleeding rates, greater resource utilization, including ECMO consultation and peri-procedural use, prolonged ICU and hospital stays, as well as increased mortality.

In this qualitative study, we explored perspectives of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) and their families on the Get to Know Me board (GTKMB). Of the 46 patients approached, 38 consented to participate. Of the 66 family members approached, 60 consented to participate. Most patients (26, 89%) and family members (52, 99%) expressed that GTKMB was important in recognizing patient's humanity. Most patients (20, 68%) and families (39, 74%) said that it helped to build a better relationship with the provider team. 60% of patients and families commented that the GTKMB was used as a platform by providers to interact with them. Up to 45 (85%) of the family members supported specific contents of the GTKMB. In structured interviews (11 patients, 7 family members), participants additionally commented on ways providers used the GTKMB to communicate, support patient's personhood, and on caveats in interacting with GTKMB. Critically ill patients and families found the GTKMB helpful in preserving personhood of patient, fostering communication, and building relationships with clinicians.