Anticoagulation for Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism

Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism

Subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) is increasingly diagnosed with the growing use and technological advancements of multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography. Its diagnosis is challenging, and some presumed SSPE may actually represent imaging artifacts. Indirect evidence and results from small observational studies suggest that SSPE may be more benign than more proximal pulmonary embolism, and may thus not always require treatment. Therefore, guidelines suggest to consider a management strategy without anticoagulation in selected patients with SSPE at low risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), in whom proximal deep vein thrombosis is excluded. Recently, a large prospective study among low-risk patients with SSPE who were left untreated showed a higher VTE recurrence risk than initially deemed acceptable by the investigators, and thus was prematurely interrupted after recruitment of 97% of the target population. However, the risk-benefit ratio of anticoagulation for low-risk patients with SSPE remains unclear, and results from randomized trials are needed to answer the question about their optimal management.

Subsegmental pulmonary embolism and anticoagulant therapy: the impact of clinical context

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation for subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) is controversial.

AIM

To assess the impact of clinical context on anticoagulation and outcomes of SSPE.

METHODS

We electronically searched computed tomography pulmonary angiogram reports to identify SSPE. We extracted demographic, risk factor, investigations and outcome data from the electronic medical record. We stratified patients according to anticoagulation and no anticoagulation.

RESULTS

From 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2019, we identified 166 patients with SSPE in 5827 pulmonary angiogram reports. Of these, 123 (74%) received anticoagulation. Compared with non-anticoagulated patients, such patients had a different clinical context: higher rates of previous venous thromboembolism (11% vs 0%; P = 0.019), more recent surgery (26% vs 9%; P = 0.015), more elevated serum D-dimer (22% vs 5%; P = 0.004), more lung parenchymal abnormalities (76% vs 61%; P = 0.037) and were almost twice as likely to require inpatient care (76% vs 42%; P < 0.001). Such patients also had twice the all-cause mortality at 1 year (32% vs 16%).

CONCLUSIONS

SSPE is diagnosed in almost 3% of pulmonary angiograms and is associated with high mortality, regardless of anticoagulation, due to coexistent disease processes rather than SSPE. Anticoagulation appears dominant but markedly affected by the clinical context of risk factors, alternative indications and illness severity. Thus, the controversy is partly artificial because anticoagulation after SSPE is clinically contextual with SSPE as only one of several factors.

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Patients with cancer and VTE are at a markedly increased risk for morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The guideline development process was supported by updated or new systematic evidence reviews. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations address mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, those undergoing a surgical procedure, and ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. The recommendations also address the use of anticoagulation for the initial, short-term, and long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include not using thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients receiving cancer chemotherapy at low risk of VTE and to use low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for initial treatment of VTE in patients with cancer. Conditional recommendations include using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients with cancer, LMWH or fondaparinux for surgical patients with cancer, LMWH or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in ambulatory patients with cancer receiving systemic therapy at high risk of VTE and LMWH or DOAC for initial treatment of VTE, DOAC for the short-term treatment of VTE, and LMWH or DOAC for the long-term treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

Symptomatic subsegmental versus more central pulmonary embolism: Clinical outcomes during anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

The optimal therapy of patients with acute subsegmental pulmonary embolism (PE) is controversial.

METHODS

We used the RIETE (Registro Informatizado Enfermedad TromboEmbólica) database to compare the rate of symptomatic PE recurrences during anticoagulation in patients with subsegmental, segmental, or more central PEs.

RESULTS

Among 15 963 patients with a first episode of symptomatic PE, 834 (5.2%) had subsegmental PE, 3797 (24%) segmental, and 11 332 (71%) more central PE. Most patients in all subgroups received initial therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin, and then most switched to vitamin K antagonists. Median duration of therapy was 179, 185, and 204 days, respectively. During anticoagulation, 183 patients developed PE recurrences, 131 developed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), 543 bled, and 1718 died (fatal PE, 135). The rate of PE recurrences was twofold higher in patients with subsegmental PE than in those with segmental (hazard ratio [HR], 2.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-3.85) or more central PE (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.12-3.13). On multivariable analysis, patients with subsegmental PE had a higher risk for PE recurrences than those with central PE (adjusted HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.02-3.03). After stratifying patients with subsegmental PE according to ultrasound imaging in the lower limbs, the rate of PE recurrences was similar in patients with DVT, in patients without DVT, and in those with no ultrasound imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals that the risk for PE recurrences in patients with segmental PE is not lower than in those with more central PE, thus suggesting that the risk of PE recurrences is not influenced by the anatomic location of PE.

Current Challenges in Diagnosis of Venous Thromboembolism

In patients with suspected venous thromboembolism, the goal is to accurately and rapidly identify those with and without thrombosis. Failure to diagnose venous thromboembolism (VTE) can lead to fatal pulmonary embolism (PE), and unnecessary anticoagulation can cause avoidable bleeding. The adoption of a structured approach to VTE diagnosis, that includes clinical prediction rules, D-dimer testing and non-invasive imaging modalities, has enabled rapid, cost-effective and accurate VTE diagnosis, but problems still persist. First, with increased reliance on imaging and widespread use of sensitive multidetector computed tomography (CT) scanners, there is a potential for overdiagnosis of VTE. Second, the optimal strategy for diagnosing recurrent leg deep venous thrombosis remains unclear as is that for venous thrombosis at unusual sites. Third, the conventional diagnostic approach is inefficient in that it is unable to exclude VTE in high-risk patients. In this review, we outline pragmatic approaches for the clinician faced with difficult VTE diagnostic cases. In addition to discussing the principles of the current diagnostic framework, we explore the diagnostic approach to recurrent VTE, isolated distal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT), pregnancy associated VTE, subsegmental PE, and VTE diagnosis in complex medical patients (including those with impaired renal function).

Pulmonary embolism: update on management and controversies

Pulmonary embolism is a common and potentially fatal cardiovascular disorder that must be promptly diagnosed and treated. The diagnosis, risk assessment, and management of pulmonary embolism have evolved with a better understanding of efficient use of diagnostic and therapeutic options. The use of either clinical probability adjusted or age adjusted D-dimer interpretation has led to a reduction in diagnostic imaging to exclude pulmonary embolism. Direct oral anticoagulation therapies are safe, effective, and convenient treatments for most patients with acute venous thromboembolism, with a lower risk of bleeding than vitamin K antagonists. These oral therapeutic options have opened up opportunities for safe outpatient management of pulmonary embolism in selected patients. Recent clinical trials exploring the use of systemic thrombolysis in intermediate to high risk pulmonary embolism suggest that this therapy should be reserved for patients with evidence of hemodynamic compromise. The role of low dose systemic or catheter directed thrombolysis in other patient subgroups is uncertain. After a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, all patients should be assessed for risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism to guide duration of anticoagulation. Patients with a venous thromboembolism associated with a strong, transient, provoking risk factor can safely discontinue anticoagulation after three months of treatment. Patients with an ongoing strong risk factor, such as cancer, or unprovoked events are at increased risk of recurrent events and should be considered for extended treatment. The use of a risk prediction score can help to identify patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism who can benefit from extended duration therapy. Despite major advances in the management of pulmonary embolism, up to half of patients report chronic functional limitations. Such patients should be screened for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, but only a small proportion will have this as the explanation of their symptoms. In the remaining patients, future studies are needed to understand the pathophysiology and explore interventions to improve quality of life.