Predictors of intracranial hemorrhage in patients treated with catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Although acute intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a rare complication of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), it remains a major concern associated with the use of CDT. The incidence and clinical predictors of developing ICH in the setting of CDT are not known. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample database was used to identify all patients with proximal lower extremity or caval deep vein thrombosis (DVT) from January 2005 to December 2013 in the United States. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the clinical predictors of ICH between patients with DVT who had received anticoagulation therapy alone and those who had been treated with CDT plus anticoagulation therapy. RESULTS: Of 138,049 patients with proximal lower extremity or caval DVT, 7119 (5.2%) had received anticoagulation therapy and CDT. Of the patients treated with anticoagulation alone, ICH had occurred in 0.2% compared with 0.7% for those treated with CDT (P < .01). The independent predictors of ICH in the CDT cohort were a history of stroke (odds ratio [OR], 19.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8-42.8; P < .01), chronic kidney disease (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.1-4.7; P = .03), age >74 years (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-4.3; P = .02), male sex (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.01-3.3; P = .048). Of those patients treated with anticoagulation alone, the risk factors for the development of ICH were a history of stroke, hospital teaching status, and age >74 years. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present nationwide observational study showed that of patients with DVT treated with CDT, the independent predictors for developing ICH were a history of stroke, chronic kidney disease, male sex, and age >74 years.

Strengthening the fellowship training experience: findings from a national survey of fellowship trained geriatricians 1990-1998.

Geriatric fellowship training has significantly advanced in the past 2 decades in number, organization, and accreditation of formal fellowship programs. A recent survey examined career decision-making, fellowship training, and current professional activities of fellowship trained geriatricians. This paper focuses upon further desired fellowship training identified by these individuals. The responses reflect skills relevant to four aspects of professional performance: administration, management, clinical geriatrics, research, and education. More than half of the respondents documented the need for increased training in administration, including long-term care medical directorship and Medicare/managed care. Regarding clinical training, 66% recommended additional subspecialty training, particularly in psychiatry, neurology, rehabilitation, and hospice/palliative care. Seventeen percent identified a need for training in research methodology, grant writing, and mentorship. Some 6% indicated a need for further training in education, citing teaching skills and program/faculty development. This article provides examples of opportunities to strengthen each of the four defined areas, including formal training in medical administration by the American Medical Director's Association, model strategies for incorporating subspecialties, hospice/palliative care, programs to pursue graduate level training in research at many universities, and faculty development programs such as those offered by Harvard and Stanford. Accredited geriatric fellowship programs as well as fellows should recognize potential gaps in training, and make available opportunities to strengthen these areas critical to preparing for future careers in geriatric medicine.