Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams: A Novel Approach for the Care of Complex Patients With Pulmonary Embolism

Roles of spectral dual-layer CT, D-dimer concentration, and COVID-19 pneumonia in diagnosis of pulmonary embolism

Purpose

To demonstrate advantages of spectral dual-layer computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing pulmonary embolism (PE). To compare D-dimer values in patients with PE and concomitant COVID-19 pneumonia to those in patients without PE and COVID-19 pneumonia. To compare D-dimer values in cases of minor versus extensive PE.

Methods

A monocentric retrospective study of 1500 CT pulmonary angiographies (CTPAs). Three groups of 500 consecutive examinations: 1) using conventional multidetector CT (CTC), 2) using spectral dual-layer CT (CTS), and 3) of COVID-19 pneumonia patients using spectral dual-layer CT (COV). Only patients with known D-dimer levels were enrolled in the study.

Results

Prevalence of inconclusive PE findings differed significantly between CTS and CTC (0.8 % vs. 5.4 %, p < 0.001). In all groups, D-dimer levels were significantly higher in PE positive patients than in patients without PE (CTC, 8.04 vs. 3.05 mg/L; CTS, 6.92 vs. 2.57 mg/L; COV, 10.26 vs. 2.72 mg/L, p < 0.001). There were also statistically significant differences in D-dimer values between minor and extensive PE in the groups negative for COVID-19 (CTC, 5.16 vs. 8.98 mg/L; CTS 3.52 vs. 9.27 mg/L, p < 0.001). The lowest recorded D-dimer value for proven PE in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was 1.19 mg/L.

Conclusion

CTPAs using spectral dual-layer CT reduce the number of inconclusive PE findings. Plasma D-dimer concentration increases with extent of PE. Cut-off value of D-dimer with 100 % sensitivity for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia could be doubled to 1.0 mg/L. This threshold would have saved 110 (22 %) examinations in our cohort.

Considerations for instituting pediatric pulmonary embolism response teams: A tool kit

The incidence of pediatric pulmonary embolism (PE) has increased by 200 % in the last decade, but at a single center, it is still infrequent. Given the unique epidemiologic features of pediatric PE, diagnosis is often delayed, and the management is empiric, based on individual physician experience or preference. Thus, there is a strong need for center-specific uniform management of pediatric PE patients. In adults, the development of pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) or PE critical care pathways has shortened the time to diagnosis and the initiation of definitive management. Evidence to support an improvement in PE outcomes after the development of PERTs does not exist in children. Nonetheless, we have summarized the practical practice guidelines that physicians and institutions can adopt to establish their institutional PERTs or critical pathways. We also provide strategies for resource-challenged institutions for partnering with centers with expertise in the management of pediatric PE.

Need for a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative-Promoting a Team-Based Model of Care to Improve Outcomes and Identify Best Practices

Cardiogenic shock continues to carry a high mortality rate despite contemporary care, with no breakthrough therapies shown to improve survival over the past few decades. It is a time-sensitive condition that commonly results in cardiovascular complications and multisystem organ failure, necessitating multidisciplinary expertise. Managing patients with cardiogenic shock remains challenging even in well-resourced settings, and an important subgroup of patients may require cardiac replacement therapy. As a result, the idea of leveraging the collective cognitive and procedural proficiencies of multiple providers in a collaborative, team-based approach to care (the "shock team") has been advocated by professional societies and implemented at select high-volume clinical centers. A slowly maturing evidence base has suggested that cardiogenic shock teams may improve patient outcomes. Although several registries exist that are beginning to inform care, particularly around therapeutic strategies of pharmacologic and mechanical circulatory support, none of these are currently focused on the shock team approach, multispecialty partnership, education, or process improvement. We propose the creation of a Cardiogenic Shock Team Collaborative-akin to the successful Pulmonary Embolism Response Team Consortium-with a goal to promote sharing of care protocols, education of stakeholders, and discovery of how process and performance may influence patient outcomes, quality, resource consumption, and costs of care.

Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes between Early and Late Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Retrospective Observational Study

The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether early initiation of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) in patients presenting with acute pulmonary embolism is associated with improved in-hospital outcomes. A retrospective cohort was extracted from the 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample database, consisting of 21,730 weighted admissions undergoing CDT acute PE. From the time of admission, the sample was divided into early (<48 h) and late interventions (>48 h). Outcomes were measured using regression analysis and propensity score matching. No significant differences in mortality, cardiac arrest, cardiogenic shock, or intracranial hemorrhage (p > 0.05) were found between the early and late CDT groups. Late CDT patients had a higher likelihood of receiving systemic thrombolysis (3.21 [2.18-4.74], p < 0.01), blood transfusion (1.84 [1.41-2.40], p < 0.01), intubation (1.33 [1.05-1.70], p = 0.02), discharge disposition to care facilities (1.32 [1.14-1.53], p < 0.01). and having acute kidney injury (1.42 [1.25-1.61], p < 0.01). Predictors of late intervention were older age, female sex, non-white ethnicity, non-teaching hospital admission, hospitals with higher bed sizes, and weekend admission (p < 0.01). This study represents a comprehensive evaluation of outcomes associated with the time interval for initiating CDT, revealing reduced morbidity with early intervention. Additionally, it identifies predictors associated with delayed CDT initiation. The broader ramifications of these findings, particularly in relation to hospital resource utilization and health disparities, warrant further exploration.

Case of intraoperative acute pulmonary embolism diagnosed by transesophageal echocardiography under general anesthesia and successfully managed with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE), which carries a high mortality rate, is difficult to diagnose when it occurs intraoperatively. Therefore, patient prognosis depends on a prompt diagnosis by anesthesiologists. A 49-year-old woman underwent right lower extremity dissection due to a contusion of the right lower extremity caused by trauma. Eleven days after surgery, she underwent debridement for necrosis of the amputation wound. Intraoperatively, a drop in blood pressure and tachycardia were observed, and PTE was suspected based on a rapid deterioration in oxygen saturation and a drop in end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) showed a thrombus filling the right pulmonary artery, and a diagnosis of PTE was made. The patient was treated using venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and thrombectomy was performed the next day to save her life. In this case, we were able to diagnose and treat the intraoperative acute PTE at an early stage. In addition, the appropriate choice of treatment saved the patient's life without complications.

Acute Pulmonary Embolism Code and Rapid Response Teams are Necessary: A Review of Global and Mexico's Teams (MGH PERT)

Pulmonary embolism (PE) worldwide is an underdiagnosed disease; at the moment, there are no statistical data to make inferences regarding the thrombotic problem in Mexico. Although, in general, small emboli (subsegmental) are well tolerated in the pulmonary circulation, difficulties frequently occur for medium to large emboli that occlude more than 30% of the pulmonary circulation. In the United States, it is estimated that up to 100,000 PE-related deaths occur each year. A PE code consists of activating a group of specialists in PE for the consensual making of therapeutic decisions; it is beneficial for the clinical evolution of these patients and reduces their mortality; a PE response team (PERT) codes in reference hospitals to manage this disease. This report presents an updated summary of the PERT status globally and in Mexico, the explanation of why a PE code is necessary, and the effects of PERT teams in the detection (chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, chronic thromboembolic disease, and venous thromboembolism); therapeutic procedures (catheter-directed thrombolysis, systemic thrombolysis or surgical thrombectomy); selection of patients from low to high risk of PE; and future directions for PERT teams.

Pulmonary embolism response teams: Changing the paradigm in the care for acute pulmonary embolism

Pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) have emerged as a multidisciplinary, multispecialty team of experts in the care of highly complex symptomatic acute pulmonary embolism (PE), with a centralized unique activation process, providing rapid multimodality assessment and risk stratification, formulating the best individualized diagnostic and therapeutic approach, streamlining the care in challenging clinical case scenarios (e.g., intermediate-high risk and high-risk PE), and facilitating the implementation of the recommended therapeutic strategies on time. PERTs are currently changing how complex acute PE cases are approached. The structure, organization, and function of a given PERT may vary from hospital to hospital, depending on local expertise, specific resources, and infrastructure for a given academic hospital center. Current emerging data demonstrate the value of PERTs in improving time to PE diagnosis; shorter time to initiation of anticoagulation reducing hospital length of stay; increasing use of advanced therapies without an increase in bleeding; and in some reports, decreasing mortality. Importantly, PERTs are positively impacting outcomes by changing the paradigm of care for acute PE through global adoption by the health-care community.

Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams: Theory, Implementation, and Unanswered Questions

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.

Comparison of Pulmonary Emboli Management Between Pulmonary Emboli Response Team and the Conventional Method: The First Study From Iran

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) for intermediate-high risk and high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) patients.

METHODS

This single-blind clinical trial was performed in 2019-2021, evaluating patients with intermediate-high risk and high risk of PE. Patients in the intervention group were managed by the PERT team, and treatment plans were implemented as soon as possible. Patients in the other group received conventional PE treatments based on the hospital protocols. We compared the primary outcome of short-term mortality between the 2 groups and secondary outcomes, including right ventricle indices, hospital length-of-stay, time to decision, 30-day and in-hospital bleeding.

RESULTS

Data of 74 patients were analyzed. We found no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding short-term mortality (P = 0.642), bleeding, and other complications. However, the length-of-stay and time to decision were significantly lower in patients treated by the PERT team (P < 0.001 for both). Further evaluations revealed that patients in the intervention group had a more significant reduction in the right ventricle size and systolic pulmonary pressure compared with the control group (P = 0.015, P = 0.039, respectively). In addition, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and fractional area change increased more in the intervention group (P = 0.023, P = 0.016, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The PERT team led to significantly less time to make decisions, and it was able to select patients for advanced treatments more appropriately. Due to these facts, patients treated by PERT had significantly lower hospitalization duration and better right ventricle indices compared to controls.

Impact and role of pulmonary embolism response teams in venous thromboembolism associated with COVID-19

Venous thromboembolism associated with COVID-19, particularly acute pulmonary embolism, may represent a challenging and complex clinical scenario. The benefits of having a multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) can be important during such a pandemic. The aim of PERT in the care of such patients is to provide fast, appropriate, multidisciplinary, team-based approach, with the common goal to tailor the best therapeutic decision making, prioritizing always optimal patient care, especially given lack of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines in the setting of COVID-19, which potentially confers a significant prothrombotic state. Herein, we would like to briefly emphasize the importance and potential critical role of PERT in the care of patients in which these two devastating illnesses are present together.

Prognostic Value of D-Dimer in Younger Patients with Pulmonary Embolism

In patients with pulmonary embolism (PE), the D-Dimer assay is commonly utilized as part of the diagnostic workup, but data on D-Dimer for early risk stratification and short-term mortality prediction are limited. The purpose of this study was to determine D-Dimer levels as a predictive biomarker of PE outcomes in younger (<50 years of age) compared to older patients. We conducted retrospective analysis for 930 patients diagnosed with PE between 2015 and 2019 as part of the Serbian University Multicenter Pulmonary Embolism Registry (SUPER).All patients had D-Dimer levels measured within 24 hours of hospital admission. The primary outcome was mortality at 30 days or during hospitalization. Patients were categorized into two groups based on age (≤ 50 and >50 years of age). Younger patients constituted 20.5% of the study cohort. Regarding all-cause mortality, 5.2% (10/191)of patients died in group under the 50 years of age; the short-term all-causemortality was 12.4% (92/739) in older group.We have found that there was significant difference in plasma D-Dimer level between patients ≤ 50 years of age and older group (>50), p= 0.006.D-Dimer plasma level had good predictive value for the primary outcome in younger patients (c-statistics 0.710; 95% CI, 0.640-0.773; p<0.031). The optimal cutoff level for D-Dimer to predict PE-cause death in patients aged > 50 years was found to be 8.8 mg/l FEU(c-statistics 0,580; 95% CI 0.544-0.616; p=0.049). In younger PE patients, D-Dimer levels have good prognostic performance for 30-day all-cause mortalityand concentrations above 6.3 mg/l FEU are associated with increased risk of death. D-Dimer in patients aged over 50 years does not have predictive ability for all-caused short-term mortality. The relationship between D-Dimer and age in patients with PE may need further evaluation.

Top four types of sentinel events in Saudi Arabia during the period 2016-19

BACKGROUND

This study discusses the summary, investigation and root causes of the top four sentinel events (SEs) in Saudi Arabia (SA) that occurred between January 2016 and December 2019, as reported by the Ministry of Health (MOH) and private hospitals through the MOH SE reporting system (SERS). It is intended for use by legislators, health-care facilities and the public to shed light on areas that still need improvement to preserve patient safety.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to review the most common SEs reported by the MOH and private hospitals between the years 2016 and 2019 to assess the patterns and identify risk areas and the common root causes of these events in order to promote country-wide learning and support services that can improve patient safety.

METHODS

In this retrospective descriptive study, the data were retrieved from the SERS, which routinely collects records from both MOH and private hospitals in SA. SEs were analyzed by type of event, location, time, patient demographics, outcome and root causes.

RESULTS

There were 727 SEs during this period, 38.4% of which were under the category of unexpected patient death, 19.4% under maternal death, 11.7% under unexpected loss of limb or function and 9.9% under retained instruments or sponge. Common root causes were related to policies and procedures, guidelines, miscommunication between health-care facilities, shortage of staff and lack of competencies.

CONCLUSION

Given these results, efforts should focus on improving the care of deteriorating patients in general wards, ICU (Intensive Care Units) admission/discharge criteria and maternal, child and surgical safety. The results also highlighted the problem of underreporting of SEs, which needs to be addressed and improved. Linking data sources such as claims and patient complaints databases and electronic medical records to the national reporting system must also be considered to ensure an optimal estimation of the number of events.

Effects of a Consensus-Based Pulmonary Embolism Treatment Algorithm and Response Team on Treatment Modality Choices, Outcomes, and Complications

Pulmonary embolism (PE) treatment depends on disease severity and risk of complications. Physician and institutional expertise may influence the use of reperfusion therapy (RT) such as systemic thrombolysis (SL) and catheter-directed interventions (CDI). We aimed to investigate the effects of a consensus-based treatment algorithm (TA) and subsequent implementation of PE response team (PERT) on RT modality choices and patient outcomes. A cohort of PE patients admitted to a tertiary care hospital between 2012 and 2017 was retrospectively evaluated. Demographics, clinical variables, RT selections, and patient outcomes during 3 consecutive 2-year periods (baseline, with TA, and with TA+PERT) were compared. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. A total of 1105 PE patients were admitted, and 112 received RT. Use of RT increased from 4.7% at baseline to 8.2% and 16.1% during the TA and TA+PERT periods. The primary RT modality transitioned from CDI to SL, and reduced-dose SL became most common. Treatment selection patterns remained unchanged after PERT introduction. Hospital length of stay decreased from 4.78 to 2.96 and 2.81 days (P < .001). Most of the hemorrhagic complications were minor, and their rates were similar across all 3 periods and between SL and CDI. No major hemorrhages occurred in patients treated with reduced-dose SL. In conclusion, TA and PERT represent components of a decision support system facilitating treatment modality selection, contributing to improved outcomes, and limiting complications. Treatment algorithm emerged as a factor providing consistency to PERT recommendations.

The PERT Concept: A Step-by-Step Approach to Managing Pulmonary Embolism

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major source of morbidity and mortality. The presentation of acute PE varies, ranging from few or no symptoms to sudden death. Patient outcome depends on how well the right ventricle can sustain the increased afterload caused by the embolic burden. Careful risk stratification is critical, and the PE response team (PERT) concept offers a rapid and multidisciplinary approach. Anticoagulation is essential unless contraindicated; thrombolysis, surgical embolectomy, and catheter-directed approaches are also available. Clinical consensus statements have been published that offer a guide to PE management, but areas remain for which the evidence is inadequate. Although the management of low-risk and high-risk patients is more straightforward, optimal management of intermediate-risk patients remains controversial. In this document, we offer a case-based approach to PE management, beginning with diagnosis and risk stratification, followed by therapeutic alternatives, and finishing with follow-up care.

Risk adapted management of acute pulmonary embolism in women

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) represents the third most common cause of cardiovascular death worldwide. Clinical practice guidelines recommend prompt risk stratification of patients with acute PE. Prognostication may accurately identify: 1) hemodynamically unstable (i.e., high-risk) patients with PE, who might benefit from recanalization therapies (i.e., thrombolysis, embolectomy); 2) intermediate- to high-risk patients with PE, who might require monitoring and recanalization procedures if early hemodynamic decompensation occurs; and 3) low-risk patients with PE, who might benefit from an abbreviated hospital stay or outpatient therapy. A fourth group of patients should not undergo escalated or home therapy (intermediate- to low-risk PE). Studies of patients with proven acute PE have shown conflicting data regarding the association between sex and presentation and short-term clinical course in patients with acute symptomatic PE. Therefore, at this time sex differences should not dictate different approaches to prognostication and management.

Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams: Pursuing Excellence in the Care for Venous Thromboembolism

Acute pulmonary embolism remains a catastrophic acute cardiovascular event, and it is the leading cause of preventable mortality among hospitalized patients. Pulmonary embolism response teams have been designed to facilitate efficiency, streamline and improve quality of care in a timely manner for complex pulmonary embolism case scenarios with a multidisciplinary approach. Herein, we briefly describe and delineate the main goals and strategies on how to leverage the strengths from such pulmonary embolism response teams, with the aim to be adopted worldwide, improve survival, and change the paradigm in the care of a potentially deadly disease.

Pulmonary embolism response teams: Purpose, evidence for efficacy, and future research directions

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Although new therapeutic tools and strategies have recently been developed for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with PE, the outcomes for patients who present with massive or high-risk PE remain dismal. To address this crisis, pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) are being created around the world in an effort to immediately and simultaneously engage multiple specialists to determine the best course of action and coordinate the clinical care for patients with acute PE. The scope of this review is to describe the PERT model and purpose, present the structure and organization, examine the available evidence for efficacy and usefulness, and propose future directions for research that is needed to demonstrate the value of PERT and determine if this multidisciplinary approach represents a new standard of care.