Abstract:Objective To compare the different interventional thrombolytic methods of high-risk pulmonary embolism after thoracoscopic radical lung cancer surgery, and analyze the experience of the treatment process, so as provide reference for thoracic surgeons in diagnosis of such diseases.Methods Three patients with high-risk thrombolysis after thoracoscopic radical resection of lung cancer in 2018 were selected as the research subjects, of which 1 patient accept simple intravenous thrombolysis treatment, 1 case of patient with simple arterial interventional thrombolysis treatment, 1 case of patient with pulmonary venous infusion interventional thrombolysis therapy, the hospitalization method, thrombolytic treatment effect and postoperative complication probability of 3 patients were analyzed.Results The length of stay after thrombolysis was 32 d, 22 d and 11 d in patient received simple intravenous thrombolysis therapy, simple arterial interventional thrombolytic therapy and combined venous and pulmonary artery interventional thrombolytic therapy, respectively. The clinical effect of interventional thrombolytic therapy is better than traditional intravenous thrombolytic therapy. All the 3 patients were followed up for 6 months after discharge, and no significant complications occurred.Conclusion For patients with high risk pulmonary embolism after thoracoscopic radical resection of lung cancer, pulmonary artery interventional thrombolysis can significantly improve the clinical treatment effect and shorten the length of hospital stay of patients, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.