An analysis from the CAPACITY database of outcomes of preoperative embolization before carotid body tumor surgery compared with resection alone.

OBJECTIVE: There is no definitive consensus on the impact of preoperative embolization on carotid body tumor (CBT) treatment. The objective of this study was to compare surgical outcomes of patients who underwent preoperative embolization before CBT resection vs patients who underwent resection alone. METHODS: The CAPACITY registry included 1432 patients with CBT from 11 medical centers in four different countries. The group of patients undergoing CBT resection with preoperative embolization was matched in a 1:6 ratio from a pool of patients from the CAPACITY database, using a generated propensity score with patients who did not underwent preoperative embolization. RESULTS: A total of 553 patients were included for analysis. Mean patient age was 56.23 ± 12.22 years. Patients were mostly female (n = 469; 84.8%). Bilateral CBT was registered in 60 patients (10.8%). Seventy-nine patients (14.3%) underwent preoperative embolization. Embolized patients had larger CBT sizes than non-embolized patients (33.8 mm vs 18.4 mm; P = .0001). Operative blood loss was lower in the embolized group compared with the non-embolized group (200 mL vs 250 mL; P = .031). Hematomas were more frequent in the non-embolized group (0% vs 2.7%; P = .044). Operative time, rates of stroke, cranial nerve injuries, and death were not statistically significant between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Embolization before CBT resection was associated with significantly lower blood loss and lower neck hematomas than patients who underwent resection alone. Operative time, stroke, cranial nerve injuries, and death were similar between groups.

Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients Treated in a Single Academic Center in Mexico: A Case Series Study.

BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a matter of concern as it contributes significantly to patients' morbidity and mortality. Data regarding the optimal anticoagulation regimen for VTE prevention and treatment remain scarce. This study describes the characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with VTE treated in a single academic center in Mexico. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of all patients with a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 hospitalized in a single academic center in Monterrey, Mexico, between March 2020 and February 2021, with a radiologically confirmed VTE, including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Informed consent was obtained from each patient before reviewing their medical records. RESULTS: Of the 2000 COVID-19 hospitalized patients, 36 (1.8%) developed VTE and were included in the analysis. The median age was 60 years (range 32-88 years), and up to 78% (n = 28) were males. Most patients (n = 34, 94%) had an underlying comorbidity and 47% (n = 17) had a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2. In most cases (n=28, 78%), VTE presented as a PE, whereas the remaining 22% (n = 8) had a DVT. The median time between hospital admission and VTE was 8 days (range 0-33 days). Regarding the thromboprophylaxis regimen, 35/36 patients received low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin on admission, most commonly at a dose of 60 mg daily (n = 19, 53%). Other complications presented were superinfection (n = 19, 53%), acute kidney injury (n = 11, 31%), and septic shock (n = 5, 14%). A total of 69% of patients (n = 25) required intensive care unit admission, and patients' overall mortality was 55.6%. CONCLUSION: VTE remains a significant cause of increased morbidity and mortality among patients with COVID-19. The strikingly high mortality among patients with VTE highlights the need for further investigation regarding the best preventive, diagnostic, and treatment approaches.

Extensive deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism as a unique clinical manifestation of COVID-19 in a young healthy patient.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism have been described as complications in previously diagnosed COVID-19 patients, especially in those admitted in critical ill units, but, to our knowledge, there is no report of venous thromboembolism in an otherwise asymptomatic COVID-19 patient. METHODS: We report the case of a 22-year-old female, healthy patient with pulmonary embolism (Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index Score 22 points, low risk) and extensive proximal deep vein thrombosis as a unique clinical manifestation of the new coronavirus disease. RESULTS: The patient had no risk factors and no familial history of venous thromboembolism. All thrombophilia markers were negative. The patient was treated as first by an independent vascular team, performing vena cava filter placement and open thrombectomy. Her symptoms worsened, and after 3 weeks, she underwent US-enhanced thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy. She was isolated for 10 days and did not develop any other clinical manifestation of COVID-19 disease. During follow-up, she remained asymptomatic and complete patency of the venous system was achieved. Full oral anticoagulation was conducted for 6 months. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 appears to be a multi-symptomatic disease, and venous thromboembolism without any other previous described COVID-19 symptom could be considered one of its diverse clinical presentations and RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 tests emerge to be mandatory in patients with otherwise unexpected venous thrombosis.