Resting heart rate as a surrogate for improvement in intermediate risk pulmonary embolus patients?

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) response teams (PERT) have been developed to improve in-hospital mortality. Identifying intermediate risk PE patients that will progress despite anticoagulation is difficult, especially because outcomes with modern anticoagulation are quite good. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the rate of anticoagulation failure (new deep vein thrombosis or PE, right ventricular failure resulting in shock, cardiac arrest, or PE-attributable death) in intermediate risk PE patients managed by PERT. The secondary objective was to determine whether there was a significant decrease in heart rate 24 h after initiation of anticoagulation in intermediate risk PE. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients treated for acute intermediate risk PE at the University of Rochester Medical Center who also had outpatient followup between November 2016-June 2019. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients presented as intermediate-risk PE and had outpatient followup. Seventy-four patients were initially treated with anticoagulation. None of these patients failed anticoagulation. Of the eighteen intermediate risk patients that underwent advanced intervention, none failed anticoagulation first. There was significant decrease in resting heart rate 24 h after starting therapeutic anticoagulation, 107 beats/min vs 89 beats/min, p = 0.0001. CONCLUSION: We did not observe anticoagulation failure in the management of acute, intermediate risk PE. Reductions in heart rate may reflect improvements in right ventricular function; we hypothesize that those whose heart rate does not fall may be optimal candidates for advanced intervention.

Clinical and imaging outcomes after intermediate- or high-risk pulmonary embolus.

Long-term outcomes after acute pulmonary embolism vary from complete resolution to chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). Guidelines after acute pulmonary embolism are generally limited to anticoagulation duration. We assessed patients with estimated prognosis >1 year in our pulmonary hypertension clinic 2-4 months after treatment for intermediate- or high-risk acute pulmonary embolism. At follow-up, ventilation-perfusion scan and echocardiogram were offered. The aim of this study was to assess for recurrent symptomatic disease, residual imaging defects or right ventricular dysfunction, and functional disability after acute management of pulmonary embolism. After treatment for acute intermediate- or high-risk pulmonary embolism, 104 patients followed up in pulmonary hypertension clinic. Of those, 55% of patients had self-reported limitation in activity. No patients had symptomatic recurrence of pulmonary embolism. Forty-eight percent of patients had residual perfusion defects on perfusion imaging, while 91% of patients had either normal or only mildly enlarged right ventricles. We identified heart failure preserved ejection fraction, iron deficiency, and obstructive sleep apnea as significant contributors to breathlessness. Treatment of these conditions was associated with improvement. Surprisingly, we diagnosed CTEPH in nine patients; for some, chronic thrombus may already have been present at the time of index evaluation. Our findings suggest that follow-up in a dedicated pulmonary hypertension clinic 2-4 months after acute intermediate- or high-risk pulmonary embolism may add value to patient care. We identified treatable comorbidities that could be contributing to post-pulmonary embolism syndrome as well as CTEPH.

The impact of a pulmonary embolism response team on the efficiency of patient care in the emergency department.

The concept of a pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) is multidisciplinary, with the hope that it may positively impact patient care, hospital efficiency, and outcomes in the treatment of patients with intermediate and high risk pulmonary embolism (PE). Clinical characteristics of a baseline population of patients presenting with submassive and massive PE to URMC between 2014 and 2016 were examined (n = 159). We compared this baseline population before implementation of a PERT to a similar population of patients at 3-month periods, and then as a group at 18 months after PERT implementation (n = 146). Outcomes include management strategies and efficiency of the emergency department (ED) in diagnosing, treating, and dispositioning patients. Before PERT, patients with submassive and massive PE were managed fairly conservatively: heparin alone (85%), or additional advanced therapies (15%). Following PERT, submassive and massive PE were managed as follows: heparin alone (68%), or additional advanced therapies (32%). Efficiency of the ED in managing high risk PE significantly improved after PERT compared with before PERT; where triage to diagnosis time was reduced (384 vs. 212 min, 45% decrease, p = 0.0001), diagnosis to heparin time was reduced (182 vs. 76 min, 58% decrease, p = 0.0001), and the time from triage to disposition was reduced (392 vs. 290 min, 26% decrease, p < 0.0001). Our analysis showed that following PERT implementation, patients with intermediate and high risk acute PE received more aggressive and advanced treatment modalities and received significantly expedited care in the ED.