scholarly journals Anticoagulant treatment for acute pulmonary embolism: a pathophysiology-based clinical approach

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 1142-1149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giancarlo Agnelli ◽  
Cecilia Becattini
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Right Ventricular ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Approach

The management of patients with acute pulmonary embolism is made challenging by its wide spectrum of clinical presentation and outcome, which is mainly related to patient haemodynamic status and right ventricular overload. Mechanical embolic obstruction and neurohumorally mediated pulmonary vasoconstriction are responsible for right ventricular overload. The pathophysiology of acute pulmonary embolism is the basis for risk stratification of patients as being at high, intermediate and low risk of adverse outcomes. This risk stratification has been advocated to tailor clinical management according to the severity of pulmonary embolism.Anticoagulation is the mainstay of the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism. New direct oral anticoagulants, which are easier to use than conventional anticoagulants, have been compared with conventional anticoagulation in five randomised clinical trials including >11 000 patients with pulmonary embolism. Patients at high risk of pulmonary embolism (those with haemodynamic compromise) were excluded from these studies. Direct oral anticoagulants have been shown to be as effective and at least as safe as conventional anticoagulation in patients with pulmonary embolism without haemodynamic compromise, who are the majority of patients with this disease. Whether these agents are appropriate for the acute-phase treatment of patients at intermediate–high risk pulmonary embolism (those with both right ventricle dysfunction and injury) regardless of any risk stratification remains undefined.

scholarly journals Early, real-world experience with direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of intermediate-high risk acute pulmonary embolism

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (11) ◽  
pp. 801-806
Author(s):  
Sónia Martins Santos ◽  
Susana Cunha ◽  
Rui Baptista ◽  
Sílvia Monteiro ◽  
Pedro Monteiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Real World ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants

scholarly journals Risk stratification in normotensive acute pulmonary embolism patients: focus on the intermediate–high risk subgroup

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 279-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Rita Santos ◽  
Pedro Freitas ◽  
Jorge Ferreira ◽  
Afonso Oliveira ◽  
Mariana Gonçalves ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Right Ventricular ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Ventricular Dysfunction ◽  
Right Ventricular Dysfunction ◽  
Cardiac Biomarkers ◽  
Cardiac Biomarker ◽  
Imaging Signs

Background: Patients with acute pulmonary embolism are at intermediate–high risk in the presence of imaging signs of right ventricular dysfunction plus one or more elevated cardiac biomarker. We hypothesised that intermediate–high risk patients with two elevated cardiac biomarkers and imaging signs of right ventricular dysfunction have a worse prognosis than those with one cardiac biomarker and imaging signs of right ventricular dysfunction. Methods: We analysed the cumulative presence of cardiac biomarkers and imaging signs of right ventricular dysfunction in 525 patients with intermediate risk pulmonary embolism (intermediate-high risk = 237) presenting at the emergency department in two centres. Studied endpoints were composites of all-cause mortality and/or rescue thrombolysis at 30 days (primary endpoint; n=58) and pulmonary embolism-related mortality and/or rescue thrombolysis at 30 days (secondary endpoint; n=40). Results: Patients who experienced the primary endpoint showed a higher proportion of elevated troponin (47% vs. 76%, P<0.001), elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (67% vs. 93%, P<0.001) and imaging signs of right ventricular dysfunction (47% vs. 80%, P<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (hazard ratio (HR) 3.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3–10.3; P=0.015) and imaging signs of right ventricular dysfunction (HR 2.8, 95% CI 1.5–5.2; P=0.001) as independent predictors of events. In the intermediate–high risk group, patients with two cardiac biomarkers performed worse than those with one cardiac biomarker (HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.8–6.2; P=0.003). Conclusions: Risk stratification in normotensive pulmonary embolism should consider the cumulative presence of cardiac biomarkers and imaging signs of right ventricular dysfunction, especially in the intermediate–high risk subgroup.

scholarly journals Early, real-world experience with direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of intermediate-high risk acute pulmonary embolism

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (11) ◽  
pp. 801-806 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sónia Martins Santos ◽  
Susana Cunha ◽  
Rui Baptista ◽  
Sílvia Monteiro ◽  
Pedro Monteiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Real World ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Risk Stratification for Acute Pulmonary Embolism

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 800-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Kline ◽  
David W. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Normal Serum ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Underlying Malignancy ◽  
Surgical Embolectomy

This article discusses state-of-the-art techniques for predicting risk of death after acute pulmonary embolism (PE), with special attention to how underlying malignancy adversely affects survival after an episode. Current methods of risk stratification generally categorize patients with PE as low-, moderate-, and high-risk for in-hospital adverse outcomes of respiratory failure, circulatory shock, and death. Published risk stratification studies find that patients with PE and an underlying malignancy have a worse prognosis, but no validated risk stratification criteria have been published specifically for these patients. Standard treatment is full-dose heparin followed by oral anticoagulation. The term escalated treatment refers to the use of systemic or intrapulmonary fibrinolytic agents, catheter-based treatment, or surgical embolectomy. Most patients with low-risk PE (normal vital signs and normal serum troponin, brain natriuretic peptide, and normal echocardiography) are treated successfully with standard anticoagulation, and many can be treated as outpatients. In contrast, patients with high-risk PE (systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg and no contraindications) often benefit from escalated treatment. Treatment decisions for patients with moderate-risk PE (normotension with evidence of right ventricular damage or dysfunction) are most controversial. Most patients in this category of risk recover with standard therapy, but some benefit from escalated treatment. Patients with cancer with an incidentally discovered PE should be risk stratified the same as those who have clinically suspected PE.

scholarly journals Risk stratification and management of acute pulmonary embolism

Hematology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 (1) ◽  
pp. 404-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilia Becattini ◽  
Giancarlo Agnelli
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Clinical Management ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Bleeding Complications

Abstract The clinical management of patients with acute pulmonary embolism is rapidly changing over the years. The widening spectrum of clinical management strategies for these patients requires effective tools for risk stratification. Patients at low risk for death could be candidates for home treatment or early discharge. Clinical models with high negative predictive value have been validated that could be used to select patients at low risk for death. In a major study and in several meta-analyses, thrombolysis in hemodynamically stable patients was associated with unacceptably high risk for major bleeding complications or intracranial hemorrhage. Thus, the presence of shock or sustained hypotension continues to be the criterion for the selection of candidates for thrombolytic treatment. Interventional procedures for early revascularization should be reserved to selected patients until further evidence is available. No clinical advantage is expected with the insertion of a vena cava filter in the acute-phase management of patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Direct oral anticoagulants used in fixed doses without laboratory monitoring showed similar efficacy (odds ratio [OR], 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.12) and safety (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.03) in comparison with conventional anticoagulation in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Based on these results and on their practicality, direct oral anticoagulants are the agents of choice for the treatment of the majority of patients with acute pulmonary embolism.

scholarly journals Acute pulmonary embolism: mortality prediction by the 2014 European Society of Cardiology risk stratification model

2016 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 780-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilia Becattini ◽  
Giancarlo Agnelli ◽  
Mareike Lankeit ◽  
Luca Masotti ◽  
Piotr Pruszczyk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Negative Predictive Value ◽  
European Society ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Risk Stratification Model ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
European Society Of Cardiology

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) has proposed an updated risk stratification model for death in patients with acute pulmonary embolism based on clinical scores (Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) or simplified PESI (sPESI)), right ventricle dysfunction (RVD) and elevated serum troponin (2014 ESC model).We assessed the ability of the 2014 ESC model to predict 30-day death after acute pulmonary embolism. Consecutive patients with symptomatic, confirmed pulmonary embolism included in prospective cohorts were merged in a collaborative database. Patients’ risk was classified as high (shock or hypotension), intermediate-high (RVD and elevated troponin), intermediate-low (RVD or increased troponin or none) and low (sPESI 0). Study outcomes were death and pulmonary embolism-related death at 30 days.Among 906 patients (mean±sd age 68±16, 489 females), death and pulmonary embolism-related death occurred in 7.2% and 4.1%, respectively. Death rate was 22% in “high-risk” (95% CI 14.0–29.8), 7.7% in “intermediate-high-risk” (95% CI 4.5–10.9) and 6.0% in “intermediate-low-risk” patients (95% CI 3.4–8.6). One of the 196 “low-risk” patients died (0.5%, 95% CI 0–1.0; negative predictive value 99.5%).By using the 2014 ESC model, RVD or troponin tests would be avoided in about 20% of patients (sPESI 0), preserving a high negative predictive value. Risk stratification in patients at intermediate risk requires further improvement.

scholarly journals Developments in the management and treatment of pulmonary embolism

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (137) ◽  
pp. 484-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Limbrey ◽  
Luke Howard
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Individual Risk ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Outpatient Services ◽  
Risk Patients

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a serious and costly disease for patients and healthcare systems. Guidelines emphasise the importance of differentiating between patients who are at high risk of mortality (those with shock and/or hypotension), who may be candidates for thrombolytic therapy or surgery, and those with less severe presentations. Recent clinical studies and guidelines have focused particularly on risk stratification of intermediate-risk patients. Although the use of thrombolysis has been investigated in these patients, anticoagulation remains the standard treatment approach. Individual risk stratification directs initial treatment. Rates of recurrence differ between subgroups of patients with PE; therefore, a review of provoking factors, along with the risks of morbidity and bleeding, guides the duration of ongoing anticoagulation. The direct oral anticoagulants have shown similar efficacy and, in some cases, reduced major bleeding compared with standard approaches for acute treatment. They also offer the potential to reduce the burden on patients and outpatient services in the post-hospital phase. Rivaroxaban, dabigatran and apixaban have been shown to reduce the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism versus placebo, when given for >12 months. Patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants do not require regular coagulation monitoring, but follow-up, ideally in a specialist PE clinic in consultation with primary care providers, is recommended.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document