Out of hospital treatment of acute pulmonary embolism in patients with a low NT-proBNP level

Risk stratifying emergency department patients with acute pulmonary embolism: Does the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index perform as well as the original?

INTRODUCTION

The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) is a validated prognostic score to estimate the 30-day mortality of emergency department (ED) patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). A simplified version (sPESI) was derived but has not been as well studied in the U.S. We sought to validate both indices in a community hospital setting in the U.S. and compare their performance in predicting 30-day all-cause mortality and classification of cases into low-risk and higher-risk categories.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included adults with acute objectively confirmed PE from 1/2013 to 4/2015 across 21 community EDs. We evaluated the misclassification rate of the sPESI compared with the PESI. We assessed accuracy of both indices with regard to 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Among 3006 cases of acute PE, the 30-day all-cause mortality rate was 4.4%. The sPESI performed as well as the PESI in identifying low-risk patients: both had similar sensitivities, negative predictive values, and negative likelihood ratios. The sPESI, however, classified a smaller proportion of patients as low risk than the PESI (27.5% vs. 41.0%), but with similar low-risk mortality rates (<1%). Compared with the PESI, the sPESI overclassified 443 low-risk patients (14.7%) as higher risk, yet their 30-day mortality was 0.7%. The sPESI underclassified 100 higher-risk patients (3.3%) as low risk who also had a low mortality rate (1.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Both indices identified patients with PE who were at low risk for 30-day mortality. The sPESI, however, misclassified a significant number of low-mortality patients as higher risk, which could lead to unnecessary hospitalizations.

Home Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism in the Era of Novel Oral Anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Outpatient therapy of patients with acute pulmonary embolism has been shown to be safe in carefully selected patients. Problems related to the injection of low-molecular-weight heparin at home can be overcome by use of novel oral anticoagulants. The purpose of this investigation is to assess the prevalence of home treatment in the era of novel oral anticoagulants.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients aged ≥18 years with acute pulmonary embolism seen in 5 emergency departments from January 2013 to December 2014.

RESULTS

Pulmonary embolism was diagnosed in 983 patients. Among these, 237 were considered ineligible for home treatment because of instability or hypoxia. Home treatment was selected for 13 of 746 (1.7%) patients who were potentially eligible. Anticoagulant treatment for those treated at home was low-molecular-weight heparin or warfarin in 9 (69.2%) and novel oral anticoagulants in 4 (30.8%). Hospitalization was chosen for 733 of 746 (98.3%). Discharge in ≤2 days was in 119 patients (16.2%). Treatment of these patients was low-molecular-weight heparin or warfarin in 76 (63.9%), novel oral anticoagulants in 34 (28.6%), and in 9 (7.6%), anticoagulants were not given because of metastatic cancer or treatment was not known.

CONCLUSION

Even in the era of novel oral anticoagulants, the vast majority of patients with acute pulmonary embolism were hospitalized, and only a small proportion were discharged in ≤2 days. Although home treatment has been found to be safe in carefully selected patients, and scoring systems have been derived to identify those at low risk of adverse events, home treatment was infrequently selected.

Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence for existing prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and determine how valid and useful they are for predicting patient outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

OVID MEDLINE and EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library from inception to July 2014, and sources of grey literature.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies aiming at constructing, validating, updating or studying the impact of prognostic models to predict all-cause death, PE-related death or venous thromboembolic events up to a 3-month follow-up in patients with an acute symptomatic PE.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study characteristics and study quality using prognostic criteria. Studies were selected and data extracted by 2 reviewers.

DATA ANALYSIS

Summary estimates (95% CI) for proportion of risk groups and event rates within risk groups, and accuracy.

RESULTS

We included 71 studies (44,298 patients). Among them, 17 were model construction studies specific to PE prognosis. The most validated models were the PE Severity Index (PESI) and its simplified version (sPESI). The overall 30-day mortality rate was 2.3% (1.7% to 2.9%) in the low-risk group and 11.4% (9.9% to 13.1%) in the high-risk group for PESI (9 studies), and 1.5% (0.9% to 2.5%) in the low-risk group and 10.7% (8.8% to12.9%) in the high-risk group for sPESI (11 studies). PESI has proved clinically useful in an impact study. Shifting the cut-off or using novel and updated models specifically developed for normotensive PE improves the ability for identifying patients at lower risk for early death or adverse outcome (0.5-1%) and those at higher risk (up to 20-29% of event rate).

CONCLUSIONS

We provide evidence-based information about the validity and utility of the existing prognostic models in acute PE that may be helpful for identifying patients at low risk. Novel models seem attractive for the high-risk normotensive PE but need to be externally validated then be assessed in impact studies.

Home treatment of patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism with the oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban. Rationale and design of the HoT-PE Trial

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially life-threatening acute cardiovascular syndrome. However, more than 95 % of patients are haemodynamically stable at presentation, and among them are patients at truly low risk who may qualify for immediate or early discharge. The Home Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism (HoT-PE) study is a prospective international multicentre single-arm phase 4 management (cohort) trial aiming to determine whether home treatment of acute low-risk PE with the oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban is feasible, effective, and safe. Patients with confirmed PE, who have no right ventricular dysfunction or free floating thrombi in the right atrium or ventricle, are eligible if they meet none of the exclusion criteria indicating haemodynamic instability, serious comorbidity or any condition mandating hospitalisation, or a familial/social environment unable to support home treatment. The first dose of rivaroxaban is given in hospital, and patients are discharged within 48 hours of presentation. Rivaroxaban is taken for at least three months. The primary outcome is symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism or PE-related death within three months of enrolment. Secondary outcomes include quality of life and patient satisfaction, and health care resource utilisation compared to existing data on standard-duration hospital treatment. HoT-PE is planned to analyse 1,050 enrolled patients, providing 80 % power to reject the null hypothesis that the recurrence rate of venous thromboembolism is >3 % with α≤0.05. If the hypothesis of HoT-PE is confirmed, early discharge and out-of-hospital treatment may become an attractive, potentially cost-saving option for a significant proportion of patients with acute PE.

Impact of relative contraindications to home management in emergency department patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism

RATIONALE

Studies of adults presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) suggest that those who are low risk on the PE Severity Index (classes I and II) can be managed safely without hospitalization. However, the impact of relative contraindications to home management on outcomes has not been described.

OBJECTIVES

To compare 5-day and 30-day adverse event rates among low-risk ED patients with acute PE without and with outpatient ineligibility criteria.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study of adults presenting to the ED with acute low-risk PE between 2010 and 2012. We evaluated the association between outpatient treatment eligibility criteria based on a comprehensive list of relative contraindications and 5-day adverse events and 30-day outcomes, including major hemorrhage, recurrent venous thromboembolism, and all-cause mortality.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of 423 adults with acute low-risk PE, 271 (64.1%) had no relative contraindications to outpatient treatment (outpatient eligible), whereas 152 (35.9%) had at least one contraindication (outpatient ineligible). Relative contraindications were categorized as PE-related factors (n = 112; 26.5%), comorbid illness (n = 42; 9.9%), and psychosocial barriers (n = 19; 4.5%). There were no 5-day events in the outpatient-eligible group (95% upper confidence limit, 1.7%) and two events (1.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-5.0%) in the outpatient-ineligible group (P = 0.13). At 30 days, there were five events (two recurrent venous thromboemboli and three major bleeding events) in the outpatient-eligible group (1.8%; 95% CI, 0.7-4.4%) compared with nine in the ineligible group (5.9%; 95% CI, 2.7-10.9%; P < 0.05). This difference remained significant when controlling for PE severity class.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly two-thirds of adults presenting to the ED with low-risk PE were potentially eligible for outpatient therapy. Relative contraindications to outpatient management were associated with an increased frequency of adverse events at 30 days among adults with low-risk PE.

Recent developments in the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary embolism

Due to the nonspecific symptoms of the condition, a diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is frequently considered. However, PE will only be confirmed in 10-20% of patients. Because the imaging test of choice, computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), is costly and associated with radiation exposure and other complications, a validated diagnostic algorithm consisting of a clinical decision rule and D-dimer test should be used to safely exclude PE in 20-30% of patients without the need for CTPA. Recently, the age-adjusted D-dimer threshold has been validated, and this has increased the proportion of patients at older age in whom PE can be excluded without CTPA. Initial therapeutic management of PE depends on the risk of short-term PE-related mortality. Haemodynamically unstable patients should be closely monitored and receive thrombolytic therapy unless contraindicated because of an unacceptably high bleeding risk, whereas patients with low-risk PE may be safely discharged early from hospital or receive only outpatient treatment. The PESI score and Hestia decision rule are available to select patients in whom early discharge or outpatient treatment will be safe, although the safety of these strategies should be confirmed in additional studies. Standard PE therapy consists of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) followed by vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Recently, several nonvitamin K-dependent oral anticoagulants have been shown to be as effective as LMWH/VKAs, and maybe safer. Determining the optimal duration of treatment for a first unprovoked PE remains a challenge, although clinical prediction rules for estimating the risk of recurrence of venous thromboembolism and anticoagulation-associated haemorrhage are under investigation. Using these prediction rules may lead to both more standardized and more individualized long-term treatment of PE.

Predictors of inhospital prognosis in acute pulmonary embolism: keeping it simple and effective!

The assessment of commonly available demographic, clinical, and easily calculable investigational parameters instead of the conventional complicated indices for prognosis in acute pulmonary embolism may help in triage in a simple and cost-effective way. Clinical, demographic, and investigational parameters were collected and utilized for the assessment of inhospital prognosis of acute pulmonary embolism in 200 consecutive patients admitted to our institute. Overall mortality was 18% and poor outcome at discharge was seen in another 18.5%. In univariate analysis, predominant presenting symptom of fatigue, sudden onset of symptoms, overt right ventricular failure, hypoxemia at admission, low SBP and DBP, coexistent pulmonary or cardiac illness, ECG evidence of right axis deviation, SIQ3T3 pattern, conduction blocks, echocardiographic evidence of right ventricular dysfunction, decreased inspiratory collapse of inferior vena cava, severe pulmonary arterial hypertension, visible thrombus in pulmonary artery, significant tricuspid regurgitation, computed tomographic evidence of total occlusion of major pulmonary arteries, diameter of main pulmonary artery, acute or chronic pulmonary embolism, renal and hepatic dysfunction, hyponatremia, hyperkalemia, troponin elevation, use of fibrin-specific agent, requirement of inotropic support, and mechanical ventilation were the variables found to significantly predict adverse outcome. In multivariate analysis, hypoxemia, no improvement after lysis, deranged liver function test, conduction blocks, and signs of right ventricular failure were the significant variables, while inotropic support requirement had a trend toward significance. Clinical, demographic, and routine investigational parameters help to risk-stratify the patients presenting with acute pulmonary embolism and to prognosticate and manage in a simpler yet effective way.

[Home care for acute pulmonary embolism: Feasibility and general practitioner acceptability]

BACKGROUND

In France, initial management of pulmonary embolism (PE) is performed in the hospital setting. The latest international guidelines suggest that PE at low risk of mortality can be treated in the ambulatory care setting. This means that ambulatory care pathways and general practitioner (GP) opinions concerning such a change in practice need to be determined.

OBJECTIVES

To determine: (1) rate of patients eligible for an ambulatory management of their PE and reasons for hospitalization of PE at low risk of mortality; (2) acceptability for GPs of PE home care and patient's desired care pathway.

METHODS

Two-part prospective observational study conducted in Montpellier University Hospital from May 2012 to August 2013: (1) in-hospital study including all consecutive patients with non-hospital acquired PE; (2) telephonic survey on PE patient's ambulatory care pathway conducted among GPs.

RESULTS

In-hospital study: 99.1% (n=211) of included patients were hospitalized and only 14.1% (n=30) had all criteria for home care. Patient's pathway survey: 68.3% (n=112) of GPs, particularly those aged 40-54 years and those who had already managed patients alone after hospital discharge, were in favour of home care for PE. One hundred and thirty-nine (84.8%) GPs wanted a collaborative management with an expert thrombosis physician and an outpatient follow-up visit at one week.

CONCLUSION

Few patients managed at Montpellier University Hospital are eligible for ambulatory management of their PE. GPs have a favorable opinion of home care for PE if it is conducted in collaboration with an expert thrombosis physician.

Cardiac biomarkers and clinical scores for risk stratification in elderly patients with non-high-risk pulmonary embolism

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prognostic accuracy of cardiac biomarkers alone and in combination with clinical scores in elderly patients with non-high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE).

DESIGN

Ancillary analysis of a Swiss multicentre prospective cohort study.

SUBJECTS

A total of 230 patients aged ≥65 years with non-high-risk PE.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The study end-point was a composite of PE-related complications, defined as PE-related death, recurrent venous thromboembolism or major bleeding during a follow-up of 30 days. The prognostic accuracy of the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI), the Geneva Prognostic Score (GPS), the precursor of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) was determined using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, logistic regression and reclassification statistics.

RESULTS

The overall complication rate during follow-up was 8.7%. hs-cTnT achieved the highest prognostic accuracy [area under the ROC curve: 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63-0.86, P < 0.001). At the predefined cut-off values, the negative predictive values of the biomarkers were above 95%. For levels above the cut-off, the risk of complications increased fivefold for hs-cTnT [odds ratio (OR): 5.22, 95% CI: 1.49-18.25] and 14-fold for NT-proBNP (OR: 14.21, 95% CI: 1.73-116.93) after adjustment for both clinical scores and renal function. Reclassification statistics indicated that adding hs-cTnT to the GPS or the PESI significantly improved the prognostic accuracy of both clinical scores.

CONCLUSION

In elderly patients with nonmassive PE, NT-proBNP or hs-cTnT could be an adequate alternative to clinical scores for identifying low-risk individuals suitable for outpatient management.

The prognostic value of undetectable highly sensitive cardiac troponin I in patients with acute pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Elevated cardiac troponin levels have been shown to be associated with adverse outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). However, few data address the management implications of undetectable cardiac troponin I (cTnI) using a highly sensitive assay. We hypothesized that undetectable cTnI predicts very low in-hospital adverse event rates.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study, we classified patients with confirmed acute PE according to cTnI detectability into cTnI+ (≥ 0.012 ng/mL) and cTnI- (< 0.012 ng/mL) groups. The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) was used for clinical risk determination. The primary outcome was a composite of hard events defined as in-hospital death, CPR, or thrombolytic therapy. The secondary outcome was a composite of soft events defined as ICU admission or inferior vena cava filter placement.

RESULTS

Among 298 consecutive patients with confirmed acute PE, 161 (55%) were cTnI+ and 137 (45%) cTnI-. No deaths occurred in the cTnI- group vs nine (6%) in the cTnI+ group (P = .004). No hard events were observed in the cTnI- group vs 15 (9%) in the cTnI+ group (P < .001). Soft events were observed at a lower rate in the cTnI- group (21[15%] vs 69 [43%], P < .001). Patients in the cTnI- group had a higher survival rate free of hard (P = .001) or soft (P < .001) events, irrespective of clinical risk. Furthermore, cTnI provided incremental prognostic value beyond clinical, ECG, and imaging data (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Highly sensitive cTnI assay provides an excellent prognostic negative predictive value; thus, it plays a role in identifying candidates for out-of-hospital treatment of acute PE.

Timing of discharge follow-up for acute pulmonary embolism: retrospective cohort study

Introduction

Historically, emergency department (ED) patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) have been admitted for several days of inpatient care. Growing evidence suggests that selected ED patients with PE can be safely discharged home after a short length of stay. However, the optimal timing of follow up is unknown. We hypothesized that higher-risk patients with short length of stay (<24 hours from ED registration) would more commonly receive expedited follow up (≤3 days).

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included adults treated for acute PE in six community EDs. We ascertained the PE Severity Index risk class (for 30-day mortality), facility length of stay, the first follow-up clinician encounter, unscheduled return ED visits ≤3 days, 5-day PE-related readmissions, and 30-day all-cause mortality. Stratifying by risk class, we used multivariable analysis to examine age- and sex-adjusted associations between length of stay and expedited follow up.

Results

The mean age of our 175 patients was 63.2 (±16.8) years. Overall, 93.1% (n=163) of our cohort received follow up within one week of discharge. Fifty-six patients (32.0%) were sent home within 24 hours and 100 (57.1%) received expedited follow up, often by telephone (67/100). The short and longer length-of-stay groups were comparable in age and sex, but differed in rates of low-risk status (63% vs 37%; p<0.01) and expedited follow up (70% vs 51%; p=0.03). After adjustment, we found that short length of stay was independently associated with expedited follow up in higher-risk patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.5; 95% CI [1.0–11.8]; p=0.04), but not in low-risk patients (aOR 2.2; 95% CI [0.8–5.7]; p=0.11). Adverse outcomes were uncommon (<2%) and were not significantly different between the two length-of-stay groups.

Conclusion

Higher-risk patients with acute PE and short length of stay more commonly received expedited follow up in our community setting than other groups of patients. These practice patterns are associated with low rates of 30-day adverse events.

Outpatient versus inpatient treatment for acute pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common life-threatening cardiovascular condition, with an incidence of 23 to 69 new cases per 100,000 people per year. Outpatient treatment instead of traditional inpatient treatment in selected non-high-risk patients with acute PE might provide several advantages, such as reduction of hospitalizations, substantial cost saving and an improvement in health-related quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of outpatient versus inpatient treatment for acute PE for the outcomes of all-cause and PE-related mortality; bleeding; and adverse events such as hemodynamic instability, recurrence of PE and patients' satisfaction.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator (TSC) searched the Specialised Register (last searched October 2014) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 9). The TSC also searched clinical trials databases. The review authors searched LILACS (last searched November 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of outpatient versus inpatient treatment in people diagnosed with acute PE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors selected relevant trials, assessed methodological quality, and extracted and analyzed data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one study, involving 339 participants. We ranked the quality of the evidence as very low due to not blinding the outcome assessors, the small number of events with imprecision in the confidential interval (CI), the small sample size and it was not possible to verify publication bias. For all outcomes, the CIs were wide and included clinically significant treatment effects in both directions: short-term mortality (30 days) (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.98, P = 0.49), long-term mortality (90 days) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.58, P = 0.99), major bleeding at 14 days (RR 4.91, 95% CI 0.24 to 101.57, P = 0.30) and 90 days (RR 6.88, 95% CI 0.36 to 134.14, P = 0.20), recurrent PE within 90 days (RR 2.95, 95% CI 0.12 to 71.85, P = 0.51) and participant satisfaction (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.03, P = 0.30). PE-related mortality, minor bleeding, and adverse course such as hemodynamic instability and compliance were not assessed by the single included study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current very low quality evidence from one published randomized controlled trial did not provide sufficient evidence to assess the efficacy and safety of outpatient versus inpatient treatment for acute PE in overall mortality, bleeding and recurrence of PE adequately. Further well-conducted research is required before informed practice decisions can be made.

Treatment and long-term management of venous thromboembolism

Venous thromboembolism covers a range of conditions from deep vein thrombosis to pulmonary embolism. Treatment aims to alleviate symptoms, minimize acute morbidity and mortality by preventing the extension or potentially fatal embolization of the initial thrombus, and avoid postthrombotic syndrome. Anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay of treatment, but treatment decisions and the choice of an appropriate anticoagulation agent are modified according to the predisposition for venous thromboembolism, the site and extent of thrombus, the presence or absence of symptomatic embolism, and patient's bleeding risk. Newer oral anticoagulants have been developed to overcome the drawbacks of other agents, improve patient care, and simplify and improve management.

Derivation and validation of multimarker prognostication for normotensive patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism

RATIONALE

Not all patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) have a high risk of an adverse short-term outcome.

OBJECTIVES

This prospective cohort study aimed to develop a multimarker prognostic model that accurately classifies normotensive patients with PE into low and high categories of risk of adverse medical outcomes.

METHODS

The study enrolled 848 outpatients from the PROTECT (PROgnosTic valuE of Computed Tomography) study (derivation cohort) and 529 patients from the Prognostic Factors for Pulmonary Embolism (PREP) study (validation cohort). Investigators assessed study participants for a 30-day complicated course, defined as death from any cause, hemodynamic collapse, and/or adjudicated recurrent PE.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A complicated course occurred in 63 (7.4%) of the 848 normotensive patients with acute symptomatic PE in the derivation cohort and in 24 patients (4.5%) in the validation cohort. The final model included the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index, cardiac troponin I, brain natriuretic peptide, and lower limb ultrasound testing. The model performed similarly in the derivation (c-index of 0.75) and validation (c-index of 0.85) cohorts. The combination of the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index and brain natriuretic peptide testing showed a negative predictive value for a complicated course of 99.1 and 100% in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The combination of all modalities had a positive predictive value for the prediction of a complicated course of 25.8% in the derivation cohort and 21.2% in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

For normotensive patients who have acute PE, we derived and validated a multimarker model that predicts all-cause mortality, hemodynamic collapse, and/or recurrent PE within the following 30 days.

Measurement of natriuretic peptides at the point of care in the emergency and ambulatory setting: current status and future perspectives

The measurement of natriuretic peptides (NPs), B-type NP or N-terminal pro-B-type NP, can be an important tool in the diagnosis of acute heart failure in patients presenting to an Emergency Department (ED) with acute dyspnea, according to international guidelines. Studies and subsequent meta-analyses are mixed on the absolute value of routine NP assessment of ED patients. However, levels of NPs are likely to be used also to guide treatment and to assess risk of adverse outcomes in other patients at risk of developing heart failure, including those with pulmonary embolism or diabetes, or receiving chemotherapy. Natriuretic peptide levels, like other biomarkers, can now be measured at the point of care (POC). We have reviewed the current status of NP measurement together with the potential contribution of POC measurement of NPs to clinical care delivery in the emergency and other settings. Several POC systems for measuring NP levels are now available: these produce test results within 15 minutes and appear sufficiently sensitive and robust to be used routinely in diagnostic evaluations. Point-of-care systems could be used to assess NP levels in the ED and community outpatient settings to monitor the risk of acute heart failure. Furthermore, the use of protocol-driven POC testing of NP within the time frame of a patient consultation in the ED may facilitate and accelerate the throughput and disposition of at-risk patients. Appropriately designed clinical trials will be needed to confirm these potential benefits. It is also important that processes of care delivery are redesigned to take full advantage of the faster turnaround times provided by POC technology.

Venous thromboembolism management: where do novel anticoagulants fit?

OBJECTIVE

To review novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) trials in the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and the possible use of risk-stratification tools to guide their use in practice.

SCOPE

MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched to identify relevant journal articles published from January 1982 to February 2013. Additional references were obtained from articles extracted during the database search.

FINDINGS

NOACs have been developed to optimize VTE management and overcome the limitations of heparin and vitamin K antagonists (VKA). The AMPLIFY and EINSTEIN trials of apixaban and rivaroxaban, respectively, investigated single-drug management of VTE, whereas the edoxaban Hokusai-VTE trial and dabigatran RE-COVER and RE-COVER II trials investigated the use of NOACs with a heparin lead-in. The AMPLIFY and Hokusai-VTE trials are ongoing but the EINSTEIN and RE-COVER trials have demonstrated that rivaroxaban and dabigatran, respectively, are non-inferior to parenteral anticoagulants and warfarin in the management of VTE. Differences in study design complicate the application of study results to clinical practice. There are multiple validated DVT protocols that effectively and safely treat patients in outpatient settings. The pulmonary embolism (PE) severity index (PESI), simplified PESI (sPESI), and other prognostic tools have been used to risk stratify patients with PE by estimating mortality risk to guide outpatient eligibility.

CONCLUSIONS

NOACs provide physicians with new therapeutic options in the management of VTE. While heparin and VKAs compose the current standard treatment for VTE, their use will likely disappear as physicians grow comfortable with the adoption of NOACs. As studies have not clearly defined the efficacy of these agents in certain patient populations, further data in special patient populations and risk stratification through the use of VTE severity scores could potentially be adapted to guide anticoagulant management and outpatient treatment eligibility.

Predictive value of troponins and simplified pulmonary embolism severity index in patients with normotensive pulmonary embolism

Background

To investigate whether 2 cardiac troponins [conventional troponin-T(cTnT) and high sensitive troponin-T(hsTnT)] combined with simplified pulmonary embolism severity index (sPESI), or either test alone are useful for predicting 30-day mortality and 6 months adverse outcomes in patients with normotensive pulmonary embolism(PE).

Methods

The prospective study included 121 consecutive patients with normotensive PE confirmed by computerized tomographic(CT) pulmonary angiography. The primary end point of the study was the 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary end point included the 180-day all-cause mortality, the nonfatal symptomatic recurrent PE, or the nonfatal major bleeding.

Results

Overall, 16 (13.2%) out of 121 patients died during the first month of follow up. The predefined hsTnT cutoff value of 0.014 ng/mL combined with a sPESI ≥1 'point(s) were the most significant predictor for 30-day mortality [OR: 27.6 (95% CI: 3.5–217) in the univariate analysis. Alone, sPESI ≥1 point(s) had the highest negative predictive value for both 30-day all-cause mortality and 6-months adverse outcomes,100% and 91% respectively.

Conclusions

The hsTnT assay combined with the sPESI may provide better predictive information than the cTnT assay for early death of PE patients. Low sPESI (0 points) may be used for identifying the outpatient treatment for PE patients and biomarker levels seem to be unnecessary for risk stratification in these patients.

Hospital costs of acute pulmonary embolism

OBJECTIVE

Pulmonary embolism places a heavy economic burden on health care systems, but the components of hospital cost have not been elucidated. We evaluated hospitalized patients with the primary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Our goal was to determine the total and component costs associated with their hospital care.

METHODS

We included patients hospitalized at Brigham and Women's Hospital from September 2003 to May 2010. Patient demographics, characteristics, comorbidities, interventions, and treatments were obtained from the electronic medical record. Costs were obtained using the hospital's accounting software and categorized into the areas providing direct patient supplies or care.

RESULTS

We identified 991 hospitalized patients with acute pulmonary embolism. In-hospital mortality was 4.2%, and 90-day mortality after hospital discharge was 13.8%. The median length of hospital stay was 3 days, and the mean length of hospital stay was 4 days. The mean total hospitalization cost per patient was $8764. Nursing costs, which included room and board, were $5102. Pharmacy ($966) and radiology ($963) costs were similar. Pharmacy costs ($966) were dominated by the use of low-molecular-weight heparin ($232). Radiology costs ($963) were dominated by the use of diagnostic imaging examinations ($672). During the observation period, an average of 160 patients with pulmonary embolism were admitted each year, requiring an annual hospital expense ranging from $884,814 to $1,866,489.

CONCLUSIONS

Pulmonary embolism has a high case fatality rate and remains an expensive illness to diagnose and treat. Nursing costs comprise the largest component of costs.

Pulmonary embolism hotline 2012. Recent and expected trials

Management of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) has advanced considerably in the past year, and progress is expected to continue in 2013. To help determine the optimal management strategy for normotensive patients with intermediate-risk PE, the Pulmonary Embolism Thrombolysis (PEITHO) study completed enrolment of 1006 patients with evidence of right ventricular dysfunction (by echocardiography or computed tomography) plus a positive troponin test. Patients have been randomised to thrombolytic treatment with tenecteplase versus placebo, and the effects on clinical end points (death or haemodynamic collapse) assessed at 7 and 30 days. The results are expected in spring 2013; long-term follow-up is also being performed. The results of a randomised trial on ultrasound-enhanced low-dose catheter-delivered thrombolysis will also become available soon. While optimisation of treatment with vitamin K antagonists incorporating pharmacogenetic testing is still being pursued, new oral anticoagulants are entering the field of PE treatment and secondary prophylaxis. Following the successful use of rivaroxaban as single oral drug therapy in the EINSTEIN-PE trial, the approval of this drug has recently been extended to cover, apart from deep vein thrombosis, PE as well. The apixaban (AMPLIFY) and edoxaban (HOKUSAI) trials have finished recruitment of PE patients, and their results will become available shortly. In the meantime, the AMPLIFY-EXT trial showed that both the therapeutic (5 mg twice daily) and the prophylactic dose (2.5 mg twice daily) of apixaban are effective and safe for long-term secondary prophylaxis after PE. For the extended prophylaxis (after the reommended initial anticoagulation period) of the (few) patients who are unable to tolerate any form of anticoagulation, low-dose asprin may be a safe albeit moderately efficacious option, as indicated by two recent investigator-initiated trials with a total of 1224 patients.

New prospective for the management of low-risk pulmonary embolism: prognostic assessment, early discharge, and single-drug therapy with new oral anticoagulants

Patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) can be stratified into two different prognostic categories, based on the presence or absence of shock or sustained arterial hypotension. Some patients with normotensive PE have a low risk of early mortality, defined as <1% at 30 days or during hospital stay. In this paper, we will discuss the new prospective for the optimal management of low-risk PE: prognostic assessment, early discharge, and single-drug therapy with new oral anticoagulants. Several parameters have been proposed and investigated to identify low-risk PE: clinical prediction rules, imaging tests, and laboratory markers of right ventricular dysfunction or injury. Moreover, outpatient management has been suggested for low-risk PE: it may lead to a decrease in unnecessary hospitalizations, acquired infections, death, and costs and to an improvement in health-related quality of life. Finally, the main characteristics of new oral anticoagulant drugs and the most recent published data on phase III trials on PE suggest that the single-drug therapy is a possible suitable option. Oral administration, predictable anticoagulant responses, and few drug-drug interactions of direct thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors may further simplify PE home therapy avoiding administration of low-molecular-weight heparin.

Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

This article addresses the treatment of VTE disease.

METHODS

We generated strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high-quality (Grade A), moderate-quality (Grade B), and low-quality (Grade C) evidence.

RESULTS

For acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend initial parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Grade 1B) or anticoagulation with rivaroxaban. We suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux over IV unfractionated heparin (Grade 2C) or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for PE with hypotension (Grade 2C). For proximal DVT or PE, we recommend treatment of 3 months over shorter periods (Grade 1B). For a first proximal DVT or PE that is provoked by surgery or by a nonsurgical transient risk factor, we recommend 3 months of therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if provoked by a nonsurgical risk factor and low or moderate bleeding risk); that is unprovoked, we suggest extended therapy if bleeding risk is low or moderate (Grade 2B) and recommend 3 months of therapy if bleeding risk is high (Grade 1B); and that is associated with active cancer, we recommend extended therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if high bleeding risk) and suggest LMWH over vitamin K antagonists (Grade 2B). We suggest vitamin K antagonists or LMWH over dabigatran or rivaroxaban (Grade 2B). We suggest compression stockings to prevent the postthrombotic syndrome (Grade 2B). For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we suggest prophylactic-dose fondaparinux or LMWH over no anticoagulation (Grade 2B), and suggest fondaparinux over LMWH (Grade 2C).

CONCLUSION

Strong recommendations apply to most patients, whereas weak recommendations are sensitive to differences among patients, including their preferences.

[NT-proBNP for risk stratification of pulmonary embolism]

INTRODUCTION

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is an entity with high mortality and morbidity, in which risk stratification for adverse events is essential. N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), a right ventricular dysfunction marker, may be useful in assessing the short-term prognosis of patients with PE.

AIMS

To characterize a sample of patients hospitalized with PE according to NT-proBNP level at hospital admission and to assess the impact of this biomarker on short-term evolution.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients admitted with PE over a period of 3.5 years. Based on the median NT-proBNP at hospital admission, patients were divided into two groups (Group 1: NT-proBNP<median and Group 2: NT-proBNP ≥ median). The two groups were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, personal history, clinical presentation, laboratory, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic data, drug therapy, in-hospital course (catecholamine support, invasive ventilation and in-hospital death and the combined endpoint of these events) and 30-day all-cause mortality. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to determine the discriminatory power and cut-off value of NT-proBNP for 30-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients, mean age 69±16.4 years (51.6% aged ≥75 years), 53.8% male, were analyzed. Of the total sample, 41.8% had no etiological or predisposing factors for PE and most (84.6%) were stratified as intermediate-risk PE. Median NT-proBNP was 2440 pg/ml. Patients in Group 2 were significantly older (74.8±13.2 vs. 62.8±17.2 years, p=0.003) and more had a history of heart failure (35.5% vs. 3.3%, p=0.002) and chronic kidney disease (32.3% vs. 6.7%, p=0.012). They had more tachypnea on initial clinical evaluation (74.2% vs. 44.8, p=0.02), less chest pain (16.1% vs. 46.7%, p=0.01) and higher creatininemia (1.7±0.9 vs. 1.1±0.5mg/dl, p=0.004). Group 2 also more frequently had right chamber dilatation (85.7% vs. 56.7%, p=0.015) and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (56.4±17.6% vs. 66.2±13.5%, p=0.036) on echocardiography. There were no significant differences in drug therapy between the two groups. Regarding the studied endpoints, Group 2 patients needed more catecholamine support (25.8% vs. 6.7%, p=0.044), had higher in-hospital mortality (16.1% vs. 0.0%, p=0.022) and more frequently had the combined endpoint (32.3% vs. 10.0%, p=0.034). All-cause mortality at 30 days was seen only in Group 2 patients (24.1% vs. 0.0%, p=0.034). By ROC curve analysis, NT-proBNP had excellent discriminatory power for this event, with an area under the curve of 0.848. The best NT-proBNP cut-off value was 4740 pg/ml.

CONCLUSION

Elevated NT-proBNP levels identified PE patients with worse short-term prognosis, and showed excellent power to predict 30-day all-cause mortality. The results of this study may have important clinical implications. The inclusion of NT-proBNP measurement in the initial evaluation of patients with PE can add valuable prognostic information.

Current status and trends in the treatment of acute pulmonary thromboembolism

Untreated acute pulmonary thromboembolism (APTE) is associated with high mortality, which is reduced by prompt treatment. Anticoagulation is fundamental in the treatment of APTE and should be initiated from suspicion. The efficacy and safety of novel anticoagulant drugs, such as oral anti-Xa and anti-IIa inhibitors, are topics in the treatment of APTE and are now under investigation. Thrombolytic therapy is a widely accepted treatment strategy for massive APTE, but its use for submassive APTE is controversial. Catheter intervention, percutaneous cardiopulmonary support and surgical embolectomy are also necessary and effective for some patients with APTE. A retrievable inferior vena cava filter is preferred for transient protection against APTE. Some studies have demonstrated the feasibility of outpatient treatment in patients with APTE after risk stratification.

Outpatient treatment in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: the Hestia Study

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) are initially treated in the hospital with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). The results of a few small non-randomized studies suggest that, in selected patients with proven PE, outpatient treatment is potentially feasible and safe.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of outpatient treatment according to predefined criteria in patients with acute PE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective cohort study of patients with objectively proven acute PE was conducted in 12 hospitals in The Netherlands between 2008 and 2010. Patients with acute PE were triaged with the predefined criteria for eligibility for outpatient treatment, with LMWH (nadroparin) followed by vitamin K antagonists. All patients eligible for outpatient treatment were sent home either immediately or within 24 h after PE was objectively diagnosed. Outpatient treatment was evaluated with respect to recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), including PE or deep vein thrombosis (DVT), major hemorrhage and total mortality during 3 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 297 included patients, who all completed the follow-up, six (2.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-4.3) had recurrent VTE (five PE [1.7%] and one DVT [0.3%]). Three patients (1.0%, 95% CI 0.2-2.9) died during the 3 months of follow-up, none of fatal PE. Two patients had a major bleeding event, one of which was fatal intracranial bleeding (0.7%, 95% CI 0.08-2.4).

CONCLUSION

Patients with PE selected for outpatient treatment with predefined criteria can be treated with anticoagulants on an outpatient basis. (Dutch Trial Register No 1319; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/index.asp).

Outpatient versus inpatient treatment for patients with acute pulmonary embolism: an international, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Although practice guidelines recommend outpatient care for selected, haemodynamically stable patients with pulmonary embolism, most treatment is presently inpatient based. We aimed to assess non-inferiority of outpatient care compared with inpatient care.

METHODS

We undertook an open-label, randomised non-inferiority trial at 19 emergency departments in Switzerland, France, Belgium, and the USA. We randomly assigned patients with acute, symptomatic pulmonary embolism and a low risk of death (pulmonary embolism severity index risk classes I or II) with a computer-generated randomisation sequence (blocks of 2-4) in a 1:1 ratio to initial outpatient (ie, discharged from hospital ≤24 h after randomisation) or inpatient treatment with subcutaneous enoxaparin (≥5 days) followed by oral anticoagulation (≥90 days). The primary outcome was symptomatic, recurrent venous thromboembolism within 90 days; safety outcomes included major bleeding within 14 or 90 days and mortality within 90 days. We used a non-inferiority margin of 4% for a difference between inpatient and outpatient groups. We included all enrolled patients in the primary analysis, excluding those lost to follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00425542.

FINDINGS

Between February, 2007, and June, 2010, we enrolled 344 eligible patients. In the primary analysis, one (0·6%) of 171 outpatients developed recurrent venous thromboembolism within 90 days compared with none of 168 inpatients (95% upper confidence limit [UCL] 2·7%; p=0·011). Only one (0·6%) patient in each treatment group died within 90 days (95% UCL 2·1%; p=0·005), and two (1·2%) of 171 outpatients and no inpatients had major bleeding within 14 days (95% UCL 3·6%; p=0·031). By 90 days, three (1·8%) outpatients but no inpatients had developed major bleeding (95% UCL 4·5%; p=0·086). Mean length of stay was 0·5 days (SD 1·0) for outpatients and 3·9 days (SD 3·1) for inpatients.

INTERPRETATION

In selected low-risk patients with pulmonary embolism, outpatient care can safely and effectively be used in place of inpatient care.

FUNDING

Swiss National Science Foundation, Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, and the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Sanofi-Aventis provided free drug supply in the participating European centres.

Treatment of low-risk pulmonary embolism patients in a chest pain unit

BACKGROUND

Several studies have proposed the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) as a risk stratification tool for discharge of low-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) patients from the emergency department (ED) and treatment as outpatients, but this has not become accepted standard of care in the United States. Chest pain units (CPUs) may serve as ideal locations for the treatment and risk-stratification of low-risk PE patients, thus avoiding lengthy inpatient stays while assuring patients are appropriate for outpatient therapy for PE. We sought to characterize the number of patients at our institution who may be eligible for a short stay in our CPU and then established a protocol for the treatment of low-risk patients in the CPU.

METHODS

We identified all patients admitted to the University of Utah Medical Center from the ED with a diagnosis of PE over the 6-year period between 2002 and 2007. We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records to identify clinical variables to calculate a PESI score for each patient. Patients who were considered to be low-risk, on the basis of PESI score (class I and II), were considered eligible for treatment in the CPU, and, on the basis of this, we estimated numbers of patients to be treated in the CPU and patient demographics. We determined results of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and bilateral lower extremity (BLE) venous duplex ultrasound for PE patients to estimate potential inpatient admission rates from the CPU. We reviewed the electronic medical records during the 30-day period after hospital admission for patient mortality. We then created a protocol for the treatment of these low-risk patients in the CPU.

RESULTS

A total of 545 patients were admitted with PE during the 6-year period. Of these patients, 282 were considered low risk and potentially appropriate for treatment of PE in the CPU. Of those, 43.3% were male, and the average age was 43.9 years (range: 14-92 years). Mortality was 0% for the low-risk group over the 30 days after hospital admission. A total of 108 patients had TTE performed and, of these, 30 had evidence of right heart strain. Ninety patients had BLE venous duplex and, of these, 15 had a deep venous thrombosis proximal to the popliteal veins. On the basis of our findings, we created a protocol for treatment of low-risk PE patients in the CPU. Patients who are low risk according to PESI score are admitted to the CPU with administration of low-molecular-weight heparin in the ED and initiation of oral anticoagulation therapy. Patients are monitored on telemetry for at least 12 hours, with performance of BLE duplex and TTE while in the CPU. Patients are admitted to an inpatient unit from the CPU if during their stay they exhibit unstable vital signs, a new arrhythmia, deep venous thrombosis proximal to the popliteal veins on BLE duplex, or signs of right heart strain on TTE. Patients who do not meet these criteria are considered appropriate for outpatient treatment and discharged with low-molecular-weight heparin and oral anticoagulation with thrombosis clinic follow-up. Given our findings from the retrospective chart review, we estimated that, at our institution, 4 patients per month would be eligible for treatment of PE in the CPU. With the findings on TTE and BLE duplex, we estimated that 25.3% of eligible patients would eventually require inpatient admission from the CPU.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a number of low-risk patients who may be eligible for treatment of PE in our CPU. Given the resources of the CPU, this may serve as an ideal location for the treatment of low-risk PE patients and allow further risk stratification and consultation beyond that typically readily available in the ED. We described the creation of a protocol for the treatment of low-risk patients with PE in a CPU.

Safety of outpatient treatment in acute pulmonary embolism

INTRODUCTION

Data regarding outpatient treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) is scarce. This study evaluates the safety of outpatient management of acute PE.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients presenting at the Ottawa Hospital with acute PE diagnosed between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2008. PE was defined as an arterial filling defect on CTPA or a high probability V/Q scan. Patients were managed as outpatients if they were hemodynamically stable, did not require supplemental oxygenation and did not have contraindications to low-molecular-weight heparin therapy.

RESULTS

In this cohort of 473 patients with acute PE, 260 (55.0%) were treated as outpatients and 213 (45.0%) were admitted to the hospital. The majority of the patients were admitted because of severe comorbidities (45.5%) or hypoxia (22.1%). No outpatient died of fatal PE during the 3-month follow-up period. At the end of follow-up, the overall mortality was 5.0% (95% CI, 2.7-8.4%). The rates of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in outpatients were 0.4% (95% CI, 0.0-2.1%) and 3.8% (95% CI, 1.9-7.0%) within 14 days and 3 months, respectively. The rates of major bleeding episodes were 0% (95% CI, 0-1.4%) and 1.5% (95% CI, 0.4-3.9%) within 14 days and 3 months, respectively. Four (1.5%) outpatients were admitted to the hospital within 14 days.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of patients with acute PE can be managed as outpatients with a low risk of mortality, recurrent VTE and major bleeding episodes.

Risk stratification of normotensive patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism

Treatment guidelines recommend strong consideration of thrombolysis in patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) that present with arterial hypotension or shock because of the high risk of death in this setting. For haemodynamically stable patients with PE, the categorization of risk for subgroups may assist with decision-making regarding PE therapy. Clinical models [e.g. Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI)] may accurately identify those at low risk of overall death in the first 3 months after the diagnosis of PE, and such patients might benefit from an abbreviated hospital stay or outpatient therapy. Though some evidence suggests that a subset of high-risk normotensive patients with PE may have a reasonable risk to benefit ratio for thrombolytic therapy, single markers of right ventricular dysfunction (e.g. echocardiography, spiral computed tomography, or brain natriuretic peptide testing) and myocardial injury (e.g. cardiac troponin T or I testing) have an insufficient positive predictive value for PE-specific mortality to drive decision-making toward such therapy. Recommendations for outpatient treatment or thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE necessitate further development of prognostic models and conduct of clinical trials that assess various treatment strategies.