scholarly journals Potential Contributors to Increased Pulmonary Embolism Hospitalizations During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Insights From the German-Wide Helios Hospital Network

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Husser ◽  
Sven Hohenstein ◽  
Vincent Pellissier ◽  
Laura Ueberham ◽  
Sebastian König ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Mixed Models ◽  
Control Period ◽  
Window Size ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Volume Depletion ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Optimal Screening ◽  
Target Period

Background: After the first COVID-19 infection wave, a constant increase of pulmonary embolism (PE) hospitalizations not linked with active PCR-confirmed COVID-19 was observed, but potential contributors to this observation are unclear. Therefore, we analyzed associations between changes in PE hospitalizations and (1) the incidence of non-COVID-19 pneumonia, (2) the use of computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), (3) volume depletion, and (4) preceding COVID-19 infection numbers in Germany.Methods: Claims data of Helios hospitals in Germany were used, and consecutive cases with a hospital admission between May 6 and December 15, 2020 (PE surplus period), were analyzed and compared to corresponding periods covering the same weeks in 2016–2019 (control period). We analyzed the number of PE cases in the target period with multivariable Poisson general linear mixed models (GLMM) including (a) cohorts of 2020 versus 2016–2019, (b) the number of cases with pneumonia, (c) CTPA, and (d) volume depletion and adjusted for age and sex. In order to associate the daily number of PE cases in 2020 with the number of preceding SARS-CoV-2 infections in Germany, we calculated the average number of daily infections (divided by 10,000) occurring between 14 up to 90 days with increasing window sizes before PE cases and modeled the data with Poisson regression.Results: There were 2,404 PE hospitalizations between May 6 and December 15, 2020, as opposed to 2,112–2,236 (total 8,717) in the corresponding 2016–2019 control periods (crude rate ratio [CRR] 1.10, 95% CI 1.05–1.15, P < 0.01). With the use of multivariable Poisson GLMM adjusted for age, sex, and volume depletion, PE cases were significantly associated with the number of cases with pneumonia (CRR 1.09, 95% CI 1.07–1.10, P < 0.01) and with CTPA (CRR 1.10, 95% CI 1.09–1.10, P < 0.01). The increase of PE cases in 2020 compared with the control period remained significant (CRR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02–1.12, P < 0.01) when controlling for those factors. In the 2020 cohort, the number of preceding average daily COVID-19 infections was associated with increased PE case incidence in all investigated windows, i.e., including preceding infections from 14 to 90 days. The best model (log likelihood −576) was with a window size of 4 days, i.e., average COVID-19 infections 14–17 days before PE hospitalization had a risk of 1.20 (95% CI 1.12–1.29, P < 0.01).Conclusions: There is an increase in PE cases since early May 2020 compared to corresponding periods in 2016–2019. This surplus was significant even when controlling for changes in potential modulators such as demographics, volume depletion, non-COVID-19 pneumonia, CTPA use, and preceding COVID-19 infections. Future studies are needed (1) to investigate a potential causal link for increased risk of delayed PE with preceding SARS-CoV-2 infection and (2) to define optimal screening for SARS-CoV-2 in patients presenting with pneumonia and PE.

scholarly journals Potential contributors to increased pulmonary embolism hospitalizations during the Covid-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Husser ◽  
Sven Hohenstein ◽  
Vincent Pellissier ◽  
Laura Ueberham ◽  
Sebastian Koenig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Mixed Models ◽  
Control Period ◽  
Window Size ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Volume Depletion ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Optimal Screening ◽  
Target Period

Background: After the first Covid-19 infection wave, a constant increase of pulmonary embolism (PE) hospitalizations not linked with active PCR-confirmed Covid-19 has been observed but potential contributors to this observation are unclear. Therefore, we analyzed associations between changes in PE hospitalizations and (1) the incidence of non-Covid-19 pneumonia, (2) the use of computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), (3) volume depletion and (4) preceding Covid-19 infection numbers in Germany. Methods: Claims data of Helios hospitals in Germany were used and consecutive cases with a hospital admission between May 6 and December 15, 2020 (PE surplus period) were analyzed and compared to corresponding periods covering the same weeks in 2016–2019 (control period). We analyzed the number of PE cases in the target period with multivariable Poisson general linear mixed models (GLMM) including (a) cohorts of 2020 versus 2016–2019, (b) the number of cases with pneumonia, (c) CTPA, and (d) volume depletion and adjusted for age and sex. In order to associate the daily number of PE cases in 2020 with the number of preceding SARS-CoV-2 infections in Germany, we calculated the average number of daily infections (divided by 10,000) occurring 14 up to 90 days with increasing window sizes before PE cases and modelled the data with Poisson regression. Results: There were 2,404 PE hospitalizations between May 6 and December 15, 2020 as opposed to 2,112–2,236 (total 8,717) in the corresponding 2016–2019 control periods. (crude rate ratio [CRR] 1.10, 95% CI 1.05–1.15, P<0.01). Using multivariable Poisson GLMM adjusted for age, sex and volume depletion, PE cases were significantly associated with the number of cases with pneumonia (CRR 1.09, 95 % CI 1.07–1.10, P<0.01), and with CTPA (CRR 1.10, 95 % CI 1.09–1.10, P<0.01). The increase of PE cases in 2020 compared with the control period remained significant (CRR 1.07, 95 % CI 1.02–1.12, P<0.01) when controlling for those factors. In the 2020 cohort, number of preceding average daily Covid-19 infections were associated with increased PE case incidence in all investigated windows, i.e. including preceding infections from 14 to 90 days. The best model (log likelihood –576) was with a window size of 4 days, i.e. average Covid-19 infections 14–17 days before PE hospitalization had a risk of 1.20 (95 % CI 1.12–1.29, P<0.01). Conclusions: There is an increase in PE cases since early May 2020 compared to corresponding periods in 2016–2019. This surplus was significant even when controlling for changes in potential modulators such as demographics, volume depletion, non-Covid-19 pneumonia, CTPA use and preceding Covid-19 infections. Future studies are needed (1) to investigate a potential causal link for increased risk of delayed PE with preceding SARS-CoV-2 infection, and (2) to define optimal screening for SARS-CoV-2 in patients presenting with pneumonia and PE.

scholarly journals Pulmonary embolism severity before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
pp. 20210264
Author(s):  
Vicky Tilliridou ◽  
Rachael Kirkbride ◽  
Rebecca Dickinson ◽  
James Tiernan ◽  
Guo Liang Yong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Demographic Information ◽  
Right Heart ◽  
Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Health Records ◽  
Retrospective Audit ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Age And Sex

Objectives: Early in the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a high frequency of pulmonary embolism was identified. This audit aims to assess the frequency and severity of pulmonary embolism in 2020 compared to 2019. Methods: In this retrospective audit, we compared computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) frequency and pulmonary embolism severity in April and May 2020, compared to 2019. Pulmonary embolism severity was assessed with the Modified Miller score and the presence of right heart strain was assessed. Demographic information and 30-day mortality was identified from electronic health records. Results: In April 2020, there was a 17% reduction in the number of CTPA performed and an increase in the proportion identifying pulmonary embolism (26%, n = 68/265 vs 15%, n = 47/320, p < 0.001), compared to April 2019. Patients with pulmonary embolism in 2020 had more comorbidities (p = 0.026), but similar age and sex compared to 2019. There was no difference in pulmonary embolism severity in 2020 compared to 2019, but there was an increased frequency of right heart strain in May 2020 (29 vs 12%, p = 0.029). Amongst 18 patients with COVID-19 and pulmonary embolism, there was a larger proportion of males and an increased 30 day mortality (28% vs 6%, p = 0.008). Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a reduction in the number of CTPA scans performed and an increase in the frequency of CTPA scans positive for pulmonary embolism. Patients with both COVID-19 and pulmonary embolism had an increased risk of 30-day mortality compared to those without COVID-19. Advances in knowledge: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of CTPA performed decreased and the proportion of positive CTPA increased. Patients with both pulmonary embolism and COVID-19 had worse outcomes compared to those with pulmonary embolism alone.

scholarly journals Pulmonary Embolism in COVID-19 Patients: Facts and Figures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nissar Shaikh ◽  
Narges Quyyum ◽  
Arshad Chanda ◽  
Muhammad Zubair ◽  
Muhsen Shaheen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Pulmonary Arteries ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Standard Test ◽  
Plasma Therapy ◽  
Therapeutic Anticoagulation ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Lower Mobility ◽  
Von Willebrand

COVID-19 infection affects many systems in the body including the coagulation mechanisms. Imbalance between pro-coagulant and anticoagulant activities causes a roughly nine times higher risk for pulmonary embolism (PE) in COVID-19 patients. The reported incidence of PE in COVID-19 patients ranges from 3 to 26%. There is an increased risk of PE in hospitalized patients with lower mobility and patients requiring intensive care therapy. Obesity, atrial fibrillation, raised pro-inflammatory markers, and convalescent plasma therapy increases the risk of PE in COVID-19 patients. Endothelial injury in COVID-19 patients causes loss of vasodilatory, anti-adhesion and fibrinolytic properties. Viral penetration and load leads to the release of cytokines and von Willebrand factor, which induces thrombosis in small and medium vessels. D-dimers elevation gives strong suspicion of PE in COVID-19 patients, and normal D-dimer levels effectively rule it out. Point of care echocardiogram may show right heart dilatation, thrombus in heart or pulmonary arteries. DVT increases the risk of developing PE. The gold standard test for the diagnosis of PE is CTPA (computerized tomographic pulmonary angiography) which also gives alternative diagnosis in the absence of PE. Therapeutic anticoagulation is the corner stone in the management of PE and commonly used anticoagulants are LMWH (low molecular weight heparin) and UFH (unfractionated heparin). Mortality in COVID-19 patients with PE is up to 43% compared to COVID patients without PE being around 3%.

Use of Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography for Suspected Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with Malignancy- a Single Center Experience

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5907-5907
Author(s):  
Sravanthi Ravulapati ◽  
Cerena K Leung ◽  
Mudresh R Mehta ◽  
Kara M Christopher ◽  
Susan K. Woelich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially lethal condition commonly suspected in patients with malignancy. Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography (CTPA) is increasingly used in the diagnosis of PE, and guidelines have incorporated various screening tools including the Modified Geneva and Wells criteria to facilitate exclusion of pulmonary embolism. There is an increased risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with active malignancy and therefore an increased suspicion in patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with concerning symptoms. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis at a single tertiary care institution. All patients initially diagnosed with an active malignancy since 2005 and underwent a CTPA between January 2010 and October 2015 were reviewed. Patients were excluded if the CTPA was performed in the setting of trauma, a history of benign malignancy, or if the diagnosis of malignancy was made subsequent to the CTPA. Data collected included patient demographics, clinical presentation, type of malignancy and treatment regimen received. The modified Geneva and Wells criteria were applied to all patients independent from the initial ED risk assessment for a PE. Results: There were 796 patient records reviewed, of which 162 patients met inclusion criteria. Out of these 162 patients, only 8 (4.9%) were found to have a pulmonary embolism. All patients with a positive CTPA had an intermediate risk per the Geneva criteria while only 62.5% had an intermediate risk per the Wells criteria. Of the 154 patients with a negative CTPA, 71.5% and 78.7% had an intermediate risk; 22.5% and 18.7% were classified as low risk based on Wells and Geneva criteria, respectively. The median age of patients was 59 years old, and the majority were male (58%). The most common malignancies in which a CTPA was ordered were lung cancer (27.7%) followed by breast cancer (14.9%) and prostate cancer (6.8%). Despite a negative CTPA, 82 out of 154 patients (53%) were admitted to the hospital. Conclusion: Pulmonary embolism is commonly associated with and frequently suspected in patients with active malignancy. The incidence of PE over a 5-year period in oncology patients was 5% in our emergency department. In total, 18.7% to 22.5% of patients could have avoided a CTPA if scoring was based on the Wells or Geneva criteria. Based on the review at our institution, the modified Geneva and Wells criteria are not adequate, and a new tool needs to be developed for risk stratification for the diagnosis of PE specifically in patients with active malignancy. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Routine screening for pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients at the emergency department: impact of D-dimer testing followed by CTPA

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniël A. Korevaar ◽  
Ilayda Aydemir ◽  
Maartje W. Minnema ◽  
Kaoutar Azijli ◽  
Ludo F. Beenen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
Final Diagnosis ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Considerable Proportion ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Screening Algorithm ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Complete Study ◽  
D Dimer

AbstractCOVID-19 patients have increased risk of pulmonary embolism (PE), but symptoms of both conditions overlap. Because screening algorithms for PE in COVID-19 patients are currently lacking, PE might be underdiagnosed. We evaluated a screening algorithm in which all patients presenting to the ED with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 routinely undergo D-dimer testing, followed by CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) if D-dimer is ≥ 1.00 mg/L. Consecutive adult patients presenting to the ED of two university hospitals in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, between 01-10-2020 and 31-12-2020, who had a final diagnosis of COVID-19, were retrospectively included. D-dimer and CTPA results were obtained. Of 541 patients with a final diagnosis of COVID-19 presenting to the ED, 25 (4.6%) were excluded because D-dimer was missing, and 71 (13.1%) because they used anticoagulation therapy. Of 445 included patients, 185 (41.6%; 95%CI 37.0–46.3) had a D-dimer ≥ 1.00 mg/L. CTPA was performed in 169 of them, which showed PE in 26 (15.4%; 95%CI 10.3–21.7), resulting in an overall detection rate of 5.8% (95%CI 3.9–8.4) in the complete study group. In patients with and without PE at CTPA, median D-dimer was 9.84 (IQR 3.90–29.38) and 1.64 (IQR 1.17–3.01), respectively (p < 0.001). PE prevalence increased with increasing D-dimer, ranging from 1.2% (95%CI 0.0–6.4) if D-dimer was 1.00–1.99 mg/L, to 48.6% (95%CI 31.4–66.0) if D-dimer was ≥ 5.00 mg/L. In conclusion, by applying this screening algorithm, PE was identified in a considerable proportion of COVID-19 patients. Prospective management studies should assess if this algorithm safely rules-out PE if D-dimer is < 1.00 mg/L.

A Systematic Review of Double Low-dose CT Pulmonary Angiography in Pulmonary Embolism

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 453-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sultan Aldosari ◽  
Zhonghua Sun
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Image Quality ◽  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Contrast Medium ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Ct Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Low Contrast ◽  
Low Contrast Medium

Background: The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review of the feasibility and clinical application of double low-dose CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in the diagnosis of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Discussion: A total of 13 studies were found to meet selection criteria reporting both low radiation dose (70 or 80 kVp versus 100 or 120 kVp) and low contrast medium dose CTPA protocols. Lowdose CTPA resulted in radiation dose reduction from 29.6% to 87.5% in 12 studies (range: 0.4 to 23.5 mSv), while in one study, radiation dose was increased in the dual-energy CT group when compared to the standard 120 kVp group. CTPA with use of low contrast medium volume (range: 20 to 75 ml) was compared to standard CTPA (range: 50 to 101 ml) in 12 studies with reduction between 25 and 67%, while in the remaining study, low iodine concentration was used with 23% dose reduction achieved. Quantitative assessment of image quality (in terms of signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio) showed that low-dose CTPA was associated with higher, lower and no change in image quality in 3, 3 and 6 studies, respectively when compared to the standard CTPA protocol. The subjective assessment indicated similar image quality in 11 studies between low-dose and standard CTPA groups, and improved image quality in 1 study with low-dose CTPA. Conclusion: This review shows that double low-dose CTPA is feasible in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with significant reductions in both radiation and contrast medium doses, without compromising diagnostic image quality.

scholarly journals An artificial neural network approach integrating plasma proteomics and genetic data identifies PLXNA4 as a new susceptibility locus for pulmonary embolism

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Misbah Razzaq ◽  
Maria Jesus Iglesias ◽  
Manal Ibrahim-Kosta ◽  
Louisa Goumidi ◽  
Omar Soukarieh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Genome Wide Association Study ◽  
Susceptibility Gene ◽  
Biological Traits ◽  
Nucleotide Polymorphisms ◽  
Ann Model ◽  
Neural Network Approach ◽  
A Genome ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Artificial Neural

AbstractVenous thromboembolism is the third common cardiovascular disease and is composed of two entities, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and its potential fatal form, pulmonary embolism (PE). While PE is observed in ~ 40% of patients with documented DVT, there is limited biomarkers that can help identifying patients at high PE risk. To fill this need, we implemented a two hidden-layers artificial neural networks (ANN) on 376 antibodies and 19 biological traits measured in the plasma of 1388 DVT patients, with or without PE, of the MARTHA study. We used the LIME algorithm to obtain a linear approximate of the resulting ANN prediction model. As MARTHA patients were typed for genotyping DNA arrays, a genome wide association study (GWAS) was conducted on the LIME estimate. Detected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were tested for association with PE risk in MARTHA. Main findings were replicated in the EOVT study composed of 143 PE patients and 196 DVT only patients. The derived ANN model for PE achieved an accuracy of 0.89 and 0.79 in our training and testing sets, respectively. A GWAS on the LIME approximate identified a strong statistical association peak (rs1424597: p = 5.3 × 10–7) at the PLXNA4 locus. Homozygote carriers for the rs1424597-A allele were then more frequently observed in PE than in DVT patients from the MARTHA (2% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.005) and the EOVT (3% vs. 0%, p = 0.013) studies. In a sample of 112 COVID-19 patients known to have endotheliopathy leading to acute lung injury and an increased risk of PE, decreased PLXNA4 levels were associated (p = 0.025) with worsened respiratory function. Using an original integrated proteomics and genetics strategy, we identified PLXNA4 as a new susceptibility gene for PE whose exact role now needs to be further elucidated.

scholarly journals Is computed tomographic pulmonary angiography justified in all patients with suspected pulmonary embolism – tertiary multidisciplinary hospital perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Morawiec ◽  
O Brycht ◽  
M Nadel ◽  
J Drozdz
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Creatinine Level ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Hospital Death ◽  
Contrast Induced Nephropathy ◽  
Computed Tomographic ◽  
Level Increase ◽  
Computed Tomographic Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Egfr Decline

Abstract Background According to 2019 ESC guidelines for management in patients with the pulmonary embolism (PE), the computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the diagnostic method of choice in suspected high-risk PE defined as patients with hemodynamic instability. In stable cases, it is recommended to assess the pre-test probability of the PE. However, CTPA with its great accuracy and wide availability in most medical centers is used as often to confirm as to exclude the diagnosis in PE suspected patients, despite the fact that it is linked with the risk of radiation and iodine-containing contrast exposure. Purpose The aim of the study was to assess the validity of CTPA use in patients with suspected PE form the perspective of multidisciplinary clinical center. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the data of from 52,474 hospitalized patients between 01.2018 and 12.2019. A total of 261 (0.5%) consecutive patients with suspected PE (in the emergency department or during hospitalization) were included into the study. Due to suspicion of PE all patients underwent the CTPA. In this group, we analyzed all available clinical data, results of laboratory and diagnostic tests (before and after CTPA) including estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), creatinine level, transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and planar ventilation/perfusion (lung scintigraphy) scan (V/Q SPECT) if performed. Results The CTPA confirmed PE in 28.9% of patients. The most common final diagnoses, established in the group with negative CTPA result, include heart failure (33.9%), pneumonia (14.4%) exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma (9.3%) and acute coronary syndrome (5.9%). Acute PE was the cause of in-hospital death in 2.4% of patients and the rate of all cause in-hospital death was 11.4%. In 54.2% of patients we observed the eGFR decline and creatinine level increase, meeting the criteria of the acute contrast-induced nephropathy in 33 of them of them (19.8%). In the group with excluded PE, mean eGFR before CTPA was 70.9ml/min/1.73m2 with the decline to mean 60.4ml/min/1.73m2 during the hospitalization (p&lt;0.01). In patients with negative CTPA result and the worsening of the renal function mean eGFR decline was 17.8ml/min/1.73m2 (p&lt;0.01) and mean creatinine level increase was 38.6μmol/l (p&lt;0.01). CONSLUSIONS The initial data collected show the overuse of CTPA in suspected PE, as the diagnosis was confirmed in less than one-third of them. Although CTPA allows to exclude or confirm PE unambiguously, its use is associated with risk of acute contrast-induced nephropathy. Additionally, in patients with exacerbation of heart failure established as final diagnosis after excluding PE, intensive diuretic treatment is crucial and may cause further accompanying renal function worsening. Therefore, optimizing the diagnostic pathway in patients with suspected PE into less aggravating procedures such as TTE or V/Q SPECT is justifiable. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Pulmonary embolism during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
BV Silva ◽  
T Rodrigues ◽  
N Cunha ◽  
J Brito ◽  
P Alves Da Silva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Reference Group ◽  
Group Versus ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Reference Period ◽  
Funding Sources ◽  
Clinical Probability

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background During the COVID-19 pandemic many countries have imposed lockdown restrictions to movement. Since the 18th of March in Portugal, thousands of people have been confined to their homes. While hospital admissions for COVID-19 patients increased exponentially, admissions for non-COVID-19 patients decreased dramatically. However, it remains unclear whether lockdown-related immobility can contribute to the increased incidence of pulmonary embolism. Purpose To compare the incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) during the lockdown period (Abril 1 to May 31, 2020) compared to the reference period in 2019. Methods Retrospective study of consecutive outpatients who presented to the emergency department and underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) due to suspicion of PE. Results Compared to the same period of 2019, the lockdown period was associated with a significant increase in PE diagnosis (29 versus 18 patients). PE patients during lockdown were older (median age 71 years; interquartile range [IQR][60-85] versus 59 years [44-76]; p = 0.046) and have lower prevalence of active cancer (14% versus 33% in the reference period). Women represent 55% (n = 16) of patients in lockdown group (versus 50% in 2019 group). Clinical probability (GENEVA score) was similar in both groups (median score 2.72 in lockdown group and 2.50 in reference group, p = 0.452). None of the patients with PE was diagnosed with COVID-19. Conclusion We have observed a marked increase (62%) in PE diagnosis during lockdown period compared to the reference period, which can be explained by the reduction in physical activity due to teleworking and closure of gyms and sports activities. These data reinforce the importance of promoting physical activity programs at home. The role of pharmacological or mechanical thromboprophylaxis in this scenario remains unclear.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document