Search Results (13)

Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a time-sensitive condition with variable clinical presentations and outcomes. Rapid risk stratification and appropriate triage are essential for optimizing treatment and patient outcomes. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers an opportunity to enhance clinical decision-making, yet its real-world applications remain limited. Objective: The objective of this study was to describe a single healthcare system’s implementation and early experience with an AI-enabled triage tool for pulmonary embolism patients across a multi-hospital network. Methods: This retrospective observational study evaluated the deployment of an AI-based clinical decision support system within a healthcare network. The AI tool detected PE and right ventricular (RV) strain and alerted the PE response team (PERT) to facilitate timely transfer and intervention. Three cohorts were evaluated: pre-AI, Year 1 post-AI, and Year 2 post-AI. Outcomes included transfer volumes, advanced therapy rates, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Results: A total of 183 PE transfer patients were analyzed: 36 pre-AI, 72 in Year 1 post-AI, and 75 in Year 2 post-AI. Transfers increased by 100% in Year 1 (p = 0.0005) and 108% in Year 2 (p = 0.011) compared to pre-AI. Catheter-based thrombectomy increased from 10 pre-AI to 18 in Year 1 (+80%, p < 0.0001) and 28 in Year 2 (+180%, p = 0.0006). After-hours diagnosis rose from 69.4% pre-AI to 70.8% in Year 1 (p = 0.027) and 77.3% in Year 2 (p = 0.088). Surgical embolectomy showed a borderline increase in Year 2 (p = 0.04), though case numbers were small. Conclusions: Implementation of an AI-assisted triage platform for PE was associated with sustained increases in interhospital transfers and advanced interventions, and a reduction in hospital length of stay. These findings support the potential for AI to standardize and expedite acute PE care in a multi-hospital health system. Full article

Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a major cardiovascular emergency associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite advances in risk stratification models, accurately predicting which intermediate-high-risk patients will deteriorate remains challenging. Systemic thrombolysis, while effective in high-risk PE, is not a viable option for a significant proportion of patients due to contraindications, and its efficacy in the intermediate-high-risk group remains inconclusive. Drawing parallels from acute myocardial infarction and stroke, where percutaneous interventions have revolutionized treatment, interventional therapies are emerging as a promising alternative for PE management. However, challenges persist regarding optimal patient selection, procedural timing, and balancing efficacy with safety. The establishment of pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) has played a crucial role in streamlining decision-making and facilitating access to advanced therapies. As novel catheter-based techniques continue to evolve, the field of PE management is undergoing a paradigm shift, mirroring the transformation seen in acute coronary and cerebrovascular care, positioning interventional approaches at the forefront of therapy. Full article

Background: The primary role of a pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) is to support decision-making processes regarding acute pulmonary embolism (PE) patients and provide advanced rescue therapies when needed. Despite a great need for its availability among physicians, PERT’s usefulness is yet to be proven. Objectives: Our goal was to establish whether patients benefit from qualification by PERT for admission to a tertiary cardiology ward. Methods: Data of all patients hospitalized due to PE for 12 months (July 2023–June 2024) were retrospectively analyzed. We aimed to compare patients admitted primarily via the emergency department with those consulted by PERT and eventually transferred from other hospitals. The primary outcome was the use of advanced therapies. Results: We identified 167 patients (50.3% women) hospitalized with PE. Out of them, 102 (61.1%) came from the emergency department, while 65 (38.9%) patients were transferred after PERT consultation. The transferred patients generally had more severe conditions, as indicated by the ESC death risk group classification (intermediate-high and high risk, OR 19.2, 95% CI 8.3–44.2). They were more often qualified for at least one of the advanced therapies than the emergency department patients (OR 23.2, 95% CI 9.3–58.1). We found no significant differences in in-hospital mortality (6.9% versus 1.5%, OR 4.7, 95% CI 0.6–39.3). Conclusions: Establishing PERT as a reference unit providing advanced treatment resulted in successfully delivering more complex treatment to severely ill PE patients. Despite their unfavorable basic characteristics, neither length of hospitalization nor in-hospital mortality seem to differ when compared to unselected, less compromised cases. Full article

Paradoxical embolism occurs when a clot originates in the venous system and traverses through a pulmonary or intracardiac shunt into the systemic circulation, with a mortality rate of around 18%. The risk factors for arterial embolism and venous thrombosis are similar, but different disease entities can lead to a hypercoagulable state of the blood, including antithrombin III (AT III) deficiency. We report the case of a 43-year-old man with a massive central pulmonary embolism with a rider embolus and concomitant aortic arch embolism with involvement of the brachiocephalic trunk, bilateral subclavian and axillary arteries, and the right vertebral artery, followed by a secondary ischaemic stroke. The Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) consulted the patient on several occasions; he was treated initially with an intravenous infusion of unfractionated heparin under activation partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and AT III substitution. After several days of hospitalisation and the conversion of pharmacotherapy to oral anticoagulants, the patient was discharged home in a stable condition with recommendations for further follow-up in appropriate clinics. This case highlights the role of in-depth diagnostics for coagulation disorders in patients after pulmonary embolism, especially without known risk factors. Full article

Advances in imaging, pharmacological, and procedural technologies have rapidly expanded the care of pulmonary embolism. Earlier, more accurate identification and quantification has enhanced risk stratification across the spectrum of the disease process, with a number of clinical tools available to prognosticate outcomes and guide treatment. Direct oral anticoagulants have enabled a consistent and more convenient long-term therapeutic option, with a greater shift toward outpatient treatment for a select group of low-risk patients. The array of catheter-directed therapies now available has contributed to a more versatile and nuanced armamentarium of treatment options, including ultrasound-facilitated thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy. Research into supportive care for pulmonary embolism have explored the optimal use of vasopressors and volume resuscitation, as well as utilization of various devices, including right ventricular mechanical support and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Even in the realm of surgery, outcomes have steadily improved in experienced centers. This rapid expansion in diagnostic and therapeutic data has necessitated implementation of pulmonary embolism response teams to better interpret the available evidence, manage the utilization of advanced therapies, and coordinate multidisciplinary care. We provide a narrative review of the risk stratification and management of pulmonary embolism, with a focus on structuralizing the multidisciplinary approach and organizing the literature on new and emerging therapies. Full article

Background: Venous thromboembolisms constitute a major cause of morbidity and mortality with 60,000 to 100,000 deaths attributed to pulmonary embolism in the US annually. Both clinical presentations and treatment strategies can vary greatly, and the selection of an appropriate therapeutic strategy is often provider specific. A pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) offers a multidisciplinary approach to clinical decision making and the management of high-risk pulmonary emboli. There is insufficient data on the effect of PERT programs on clinical outcomes. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane to identify PERT studies through March 2024. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes included the rates of surgical thrombectomy, catheter directed thrombolysis, hospital length of stay (HLOS), and ICU length of stay (ICULOS). We used the Newcastle−Ottawa Scale tool to assess studies’ quality. We used random-effects models to compare outcomes between the pooled populations and moderator analysis to identify sources of heterogeneity and perform subgroup analysis. Results: We included 13 observational studies, which comprised a total of 12,586 patients, 7512 (60%) patients were from the pre-PERT period and 5065 (40%) patients were from the PERT period. Twelve studies reported the rate of all-cause mortality for their patient population. Patients in the PERT period were associated with similar odds of all-cause mortality as patients in the pre-PERT period (OR: 1.52; 95% CI: 0.80–2.89; p = 0.20). In the random-effects meta-analysis, there was no significant difference in ICULOS between PERT and pre-PERT patients (difference in means: 0.08; 95% CI: −0.32 to 0.49; p = 0.68). There was no statistically significant difference in HLOS between the two groups (difference in means: −0.82; 95% CI: −2.86 to 1.23; p = 0.43). Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrates no significant difference in all studied measures in the pre- and post-PERT time periods, which notably included patient mortality and length of stay. Further study into the details of the PERT system at institutions reporting mortality benefits may reveal practice differences that explain the outcome discrepancy and could help optimize PERT implementation at other institutions. Full article

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a significant cause of cardiovascular mortality, with varying presentations and management challenges. Traditional treatment approaches often differ, particularly for submassive/intermediate-risk PEs, because of the lack of clear guidelines and comparative data on treatment efficacy. The introduction of pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) aims to standardize and improve outcomes in acute PE management through multidisciplinary collaboration. This review examines the conception, evolution, and operational mechanisms of PERTs while providing a critical analysis of their implementation and efficacy using retrospective trials and recent randomized trials. The study also explores the integration of advanced therapeutic devices and treatment protocols facilitated by PERTs. PERT programs have significantly influenced the management of both massive and submassive PEs, with notable improvements in clinical outcomes such as decreased mortality and reduced length of hospital stay. The utilization of advanced therapies, including catheter-directed thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy, has increased under PERT guidance. Evidence from various studies, including those from the National PERT Consortium, underscores the benefits of these multidisciplinary teams in managing complex PE cases, despite some studies showing no significant difference in mortality. PERT programs have demonstrated potentials to reduce morbidity and mortality, streamlining the use of healthcare resources and fostering a model of sustainable practice across medical centers. PERT program implementation appears to have improved PE treatment protocols and innovated advanced therapy options, which will be further refined as they are employed in clinical practice. The continued expansion of the capabilities of PERTs and the forthcoming results from ongoing randomized trials are expected to further define and optimize management protocols for acute PEs. Full article

Venous thromboembolism, commonly presented as pulmonary embolism and deep-vein thrombosis, is a paramount and potentially fatal condition with variable clinical presentation. Diagnosis is key to providing appropriate treatment in a safe and timely fashion. Clinical judgment and assessment using clinical scoring systems should guide diagnostic testing, including laboratory and imaging modalities, for optimal results and to avoid unnecessary testing. Full article

The Swiss Ticino regional pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) features direct access to various pharmacomechanical PE management options within a hub/spoke system, by integrating evidence, guidelines’ recommendations and personal experiences. This system involves a collaborative management of patients among the hospitals distributed throughout the region, which refer selected intermediate–high or high PE patients to a second-level hub center, located in Lugano at Cardiocentro Ticino, belonging to the Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC). The hub provides 24/7 catheterization laboratory activation for catheter-based intervention (CBI), surgical embolectomy and/or a mechanical support system such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The hub hosts PE patients after percutaneous or surgical intervention in two intensive care units, one specialized in cardiovascular anesthesiology, to be preferred for patients without relevant comorbidities or with hemodynamic instability and one specialized in post-surgical care, to be preferred for PE patients after trauma or surgery or with relevant comorbidities, such as cancer. From April 2022 to December 2023, a total of 65 patients were referred to the hub for CBI, including ultrasound-assisted catheter-directed thrombolysis (USAT) or large-bore aspiration intervention. No patient received ECMO or underwent surgical embolectomy. Full article

Background: While obesity is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), there is some data to suggest that higher BMI is also associated with decreased all-cause mortality in patients with a pulmonary embolism (PE). Methods: Using PE Response Team (PERT) activation data from a large tertiary hospital between 27 October 2020 and 28 August 2023, we constructed a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model to assess the association between obesity as a dichotomous variable (defined as BMI ≥ 30 vs. BMI 18.5–29.9), BMI as a continuous variable, and 30-day PE-related mortality. Results: A total of 248 patients were included in this analysis (150 with obesity and 98 who were in the normal/overweight category). Obesity was associated with a lower risk of 30-day PE-related mortality (adjusted HR 0.29, p = 0.036, 95% CI 0.09–0.92). A higher BMI was paradoxically associated with a lower risk of PE-related mortality (HR = 0.91 per 1 kg/m² increase, p = 0.049, 95% CI 0.83–0.999). Conclusions: In our contemporary cohort of patients with a PERT activation, obesity was associated with a lower risk of PE-related mortality. Full article

Pulmonary embolism (PE) continues to represent a significant health care burden and its incidence is steadily increasing worldwide. Constantly evolving therapeutic options and the rarity of randomized controlled trial data to drive clinical guidelines impose challenges on physicians caring for patients with PE. Recently, PE response teams have been developed and recommended to help address these issues by facilitating a consensus among local experts while advocating the management of acute PE according to each individual patient profile. In this review, we focus on the clinical challenges supporting the need for a PE response team, report the current evidence for their implementation, assess their impact on PE management and outcomes, and address unanswered questions and future directions. Full article

(1) Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most frequent acute cardiovascular condition worldwide. PE response teams (PERTs) have been created to facilitate treatment implementation in PE patients. Here, we report on the 5-year experience of PERT operating in Warsaw, Poland, with regard to the characteristics and outcomes of the consulted patients. (2) Methods: Patients diagnosed with PE between September 2017 and December 2021 were included in the study. Clinical and treatment data were obtained from medical records. Patient outcomes were assessed in-hospital, at a 1- and 12-month follow-up. (3) Results: There were 235 PERT activations. The risk of early mortality was low in 51 patients (21.8%), intermediate–low in 83 (35.3%), intermediate–high in 80 (34.0%) and high in 21 (8.9%) patients. Anticoagulation alone was the most frequently administered treatment in all patient subgroups (altogether 84.7%). Systemic thrombolysis (47.6%) and interventional therapy (52%) were the prevailing treatment options in high-risk patients. The in-hospital mortality was 6.4%. The adverse events during 1-year follow-up included five deaths, two recurrent VTE and two minor bleeding events. (4) Conclusions: Our initial 5-year experience showed that the activity of the local PERT facilitated patient-tailored decision making and the access to advanced therapies, with subsequent low overall mortality and treatment complication rates, confirming the benefits of PERT implementation. Full article

The purpose is to investigate how the outcomes of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) versus anticoagulation alone for acute submassive PE would affect clinical decision-making. An online survey was sent to the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team Consortium members and the North American Thrombosis Forum members. Participants rated their preference for CDT on a 5-point scale in 5 RCT outcome scenarios. In all scenarios, subjects in the CDT group walked farther at 1-year than those in the anticoagulation group. A total of 83.3% of patients and 67.1% of physicians preferred CDT (score > 3) if it improved exercise capacity and did not increase bleeding. In every scenario, patients scored CDT higher than physicians (p < 0.05 for each). Bleeding and clinical deterioration were independently associated with the mean score. Patients’ age, gender, and history of PE did not influence CDT scores (p = 0.083, p = 0.071, p = 0.257 respectively). For patients, 60% > 60 years, 65.5% < 60 years, 57.1% of men, and 66.3% of women preferred CDT across scenarios. In conclusion, the majority of respondents would choose CDT if it improves long-term exercise capacity and does not increase bleeding. Patients appear to accept a higher bleeding risk than physicians if CDT improves long-term exercise capacity. Full article