Comparison of Pulmonary Embolism and Subsequent Cardiovascular Events Between Elderly and Young Patients in the Emergency Department

[Features of pulmonary thromboembolism in women]

Pulmonary artery embolism (PAE) is usually a diagnosis of exclusion. Verification of a more common pathology takes time, which may become critical for treatment of pulmonary embolism and saving the patient's life. Since PAE is an acute disease, the time window for medical care largely determines the prognosis. Therefore, the differential diagnostic process should include thromboembolism already at the first visit. It is important to determine risk factors for PAE taking into account the patient's personality and gender. Obtained data may help the physician to determine quickly the expedience of visualizing studies, such as ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy, angiopulmonography, computed tomographic angiopulmonography. For women, it is important to collect specific information, such as the presence of large uterine fibroids, use of combined oral contraceptives or hormonal replacement therapy; to ask how long ago the patient had pregnancy and delivery, whether she has thrombophilia or oncological diseases.

Different manifestations of pulmonary embolism in younger compared to older patients: Clinical presentation, prediction rules and long-term outcomes

PURPOSE

Data concerning specific manifestations of pulmonary embolism (PE) among younger patients are scarce. We aimed to evaluate differences in clinical presentation, PE prediction rules, thrombolytic treatment use and PE outcomes in younger (<50 years of age) compared to older patients.

MATERIAL/METHODS

We studied 238 consecutive patients with proven PE who were retrospectively categorized into three PE probability subgroups according to the revised Geneva score (RGS) and Wells score (WS). Duration of follow-up was up to 115 months.

RESULTS

Younger patients accounted for 19.7% of the study cohort. Obesity and smoking were significantly more common, while comorbidities were less common (P<0.05) in the younger patients. According to RGS and WS, younger patients were more often categorized into the low PE probability subgroup and rarely into the high probability subgroup (P<0.05). We found no differences in clinical signs, symptoms, and treatment between the two groups. In-hospital (2% vs. 13%) and long-term (12% vs. 36%) mortality rates were significantly lower in younger patients (P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In younger PE patients, despite differences in predisposing factors and PE probability grading as assessed by RGS and WS, clinical features at admission and treatment were similar compared to the older group. Our findings confirmed lower mortality among younger compared to older patients.