Factor Xa inhibition and sPESI failure in intermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism.

We report the case of a 61-year-old man who presented at the Emergency Department (ED), complaining of sudden-onset dyspnea and chest pain after a long flight from Tokyo to Houston. Considering his clinical stability and sPESI 0, enoxaparin 1 mg/kg BID was started for 24 h, and the patient was then considered for early discharge with apixaban 10 mg BID. Direct-factor Xa inhibition did not improve extensive thrombus burden and right ventricular dysfunction despite D-dimer measurement reduction. Because of the treatment failure, we considered thrombolysis. Currently, recommendations to use thrombolysis in patients under non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) do not exist. Hence, the one dose of apixaban was stopped, and 12 h later, we performed successful thrombolysis. A systematic review from 2007 to 2017 did not identify any cases related to NOACs failure to reduce thrombus burdens in patients with PE and persistent right ventricular dysfunction. We also did not find any evidence of cases that reported strategies for urgent thrombolysis in PE patients on NOACs. To the best of our knowledge, apixaban's failure to reduce thrombus burden, persistent right ventricular dysfunction, and a NOACs-thrombolysis bridge in patients with PE on apixaban has not been previously described. Both the bedside risk stratification and the therapeutic failures should alert clinicians in the ED to the potential limitations of low-molecular-weight heparin, NOACs therapy, and sPESI in the setting of intermediate-high-risk PE.

Findings of a mixed transfemoral aortic valve implantation program using Edwards and CoreValve devices.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Transfemoral implantation of an Edwards SAPIEN (ES) or Medtronic CoreValve (MCV) aortic valve prosthesis is an alternative to surgical replacement for patients with severe aortic stenosis and a high surgical risk. The study's aim was to compare results obtained with these two devices. METHODS: Prospective observational study of transfemoral prosthesis implantation performed at our center. RESULTS: Of the 76 patients (age 83 ± 6 years, 63% female, logistic EuroSCORE 18 ± 9) included, 50 were assigned the ES and 26 the MCV device. There was no difference between the groups in age, sex, functional class, valve area, associated conditions, or EuroSCORE. Implantation was successful in 84% of the ES group and 100% of the MCV group (P = .04). There were three cases of tamponade, two aortic dissections and one valve malposition in the ES group. The two groups had similar vascular access complication rates (26% vs. 23%; P=NS), but pacemaker need was greater with the MCV (10% vs. 39%; P = .003). Mortality rates at 30 days were 12% and 20% (P = NS) in the ES and MCV groups, respectively, and at 1 year, 24% and 20% (P = NS), respectively. After a follow-up of 367 ± 266 days in the ES group and 172 ± 159 days in the MCV group, three patients died. Clinical improvement was maintained in other patients and no echocardiographic changes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality, the complication rate and medium-term outcomes were similar with the two devices. The only difference observed was a higher implantation success rate with the MCV, although at the expense of a greater frequency of atrioventricular block.