Outpatient treatment of pulmonary embolism.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is traditionally treated in hospital. Growing evidence from non randomized prospective studies suggests that a substantial proportion of patients with non-massive PE might be safely treated in the outpatient setting using low molecular weight heparins. Based on this evidence, professional societies started to recommend outpatient care for selected patients with non-massive PE. Despite these recommendations, outpatient treatment of non-massive PE appears to be uncommon in clinical practice. The major barriers to PE outpatient care are, firstly, the uncertainty as how to identify low risk patients with PE who are candidates for outpatient care and secondly the lack of high quality evidence from randomized trials demonstrating the safety of PE outpatient care compared to traditional inpatient management. Also, although clinical prognostic models, echocardiography and cardiac biomarkers accurately identify low risk patients with PE in prospective studies, the benefit of risk stratification strategies based on these instruments should be demonstrated in prospective management studies and clinical trials before they can be implemented as decision aids to guide PE outpatient treatment. Before high quality evidence documenting the safety of an outpatient treatment approach is published, outpatient management of non-massive PE cannot be generally recommended.

A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: A simple prognostic model could help identify patients with pulmonary embolism who are at low risk of death and are candidates for outpatient treatment. METHODS: We randomly allocated 15,531 retrospectively identified inpatients who had a discharge diagnosis of pulmonary embolism from 186 Pennsylvania hospitals to derivation (67%) and internal validation (33%) samples. We derived our rule to predict 30-day mortality using classification tree analysis and patient data routinely available at initial examination as potential predictor variables. We used data from a European prospective study to externally validate the rule among 221 inpatients with pulmonary embolism. We determined mortality and nonfatal adverse medical outcomes across derivation and validation samples. RESULTS: Our final model consisted of 10 patient factors (age > or = 70 years; history of cancer, heart failure, chronic lung disease, chronic renal disease, and cerebrovascular disease; and clinical variables of pulse rate > or = 110 beats/min, systolic blood pressure < 100 mm Hg, altered mental status, and arterial oxygen saturation < 90%). Patients with none of these factors were defined as low risk. The 30-day mortality rates for low-risk patients were 0.6%, 1.5%, and 0% in the derivation, internal validation, and external validation samples, respectively. The rates of nonfatal adverse medical outcomes were less than 1% among low-risk patients across all study samples. CONCLUSIONS: This simple prediction rule accurately identifies patients with pulmonary embolism who are at low risk of short-term mortality and other adverse medical outcomes. Prospective validation of this rule is important before its implementation as a decision aid for outpatient treatment.

Apports et limites de la scintigraphie pulmonaire dans le diagnostic de l'embolie pulmonaire [Value and limitation of pulmonary scintigraphy in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism].

Perfusion lung scan, whether associated with a ventilation lung scan or not, is frequently used in the diagnosis of pulmonary emboli. The characteristics of perfusion lung scan are reviewed. The added diagnostic value of standard chest X-ray and of ventilation scan is discussed, as well as its use in the intensive care unit.

Symptomatic in-hospital deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism following hip and knee arthroplasty among patients receiving recommended prophylaxis: a systematic review.

CONTEXT: Symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total or partial knee arthroplasty (TPKA) and after total or partial hip arthroplasty (TPHA) are proposed patient safety indicators, but its incidence prior to discharge is not defined. OBJECTIVE: To establish a literature-based estimate of symptomatic VTE event rates prior to hospital discharge in patients undergoing TPHA or TPKA. DATA SOURCES: Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (1996 to 2011), supplemented by relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION: Reports of incidence of symptomatic postoperative pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) before hospital discharge in patients who received VTE prophylaxis with either a low-molecular-weight heparin or a subcutaneous factor Xa inhibitor or oral direct inhibitor of factors Xa or IIa. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and observational studies that reported rates of postoperative symptomatic VTE in patients who received recommended VTE prophylaxis after undergoing TPHA or TPKA. Data were independently extracted by 2 analysts, and pooled incidence rates of VTE, DVT, and pulmonary embolism were estimated using random-effects models. RESULTS: The analysis included 44,844 cases provided by 47 studies. The pooled rates of symptomatic postoperative VTE before hospital discharge were 1.09% (95% CI, 0.85%-1.33%) for patients undergoing TPKA and 0.53% (95% CI, 0.35%-0.70%) for those undergoing TPHA. The pooled rates of symptomatic DVT were 0.63% (95% CI, 0.47%-0.78%) for knee arthroplasty and 0.26% (95% CI, 0.14%-0.37%) for hip arthroplasty. The pooled rates for pulmonary embolism were 0.27% (95% CI, 0.16%-0.38%) for knee arthroplasty and 0.14% (95% CI, 0.07%-0.21%) for hip arthroplasty. There was significant heterogeneity for the pooled incidence rates of symptomatic postoperative VTE in TPKA studies but less heterogeneity for DVT and pulmonary embolism in TPKA studies and for VTE, DVT, and pulmonary embolism in TPHA studies. CONCLUSION: Using current VTE prophylaxis, approximately 1 in 100 patients undergoing TPKA and approximately 1 in 200 patients undergoing TPHA develops symptomatic VTE prior to hospital discharge.

Validation of a clinical algorithm to identify low-risk patients with pulmonary embolism.

Summary Background: We previously derived a clinical prognostic algorithm to identify patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) who are at low-risk of short-term mortality who could be safely discharged early or treated entirely in an outpatient setting. Objectives: To externally validate the clinical prognostic algorithm in an independent patient sample. Methods: We validated the algorithm in 983 consecutive patients prospectively diagnosed with PE at an emergency department of a university hospital. Patients with none of the algorithm's 10 prognostic variables (age >/= 70 years, cancer, heart failure, chronic lung disease, chronic renal disease, cerebrovascular disease, pulse >/= 110/min., systolic blood pressure < 100 mm Hg, oxygen saturation < 90%, and altered mental status) at baseline were defined as low-risk. We compared 30-day overall mortality among low-risk patients based on the algorithm between the validation and the original derivation sample. We also assessed the rate of PE-related and bleeding-related mortality among low-risk patients. Results: Overall, the algorithm classified 16.3% of patients with PE as low-risk. Mortality at 30 days was 1.9% among low-risk patients and did not differ between the validation and the original derivation sample. Among low-risk patients, only 0.6% died from definite or possible PE, and 0% died from bleeding. Conclusions: This study validates an easy-to-use, clinical prognostic algorithm for PE that accurately identifies patients with PE who are at low-risk of short-term mortality. Low-risk patients based on our algorithm are potential candidates for less costly outpatient treatment.

Oedeme pulmonaire chez un jeune homme sportif [Acute pulmonary oedema in a young sportive man]

This article reports the case of a 31 years old man who suffered from an acute pulmonary oedema after laryngospasma following extubation. This pathology, better known by anesthesiologists than internists, results primarly from a rapid rise in negative intrapleural pressure. It is not associated with previous cardio-pulmonary illness and has a begnin course with resolution within 48 hours with oxygen and positive end expiratory pressure support.

Outpatient treatment of pulmonary embolism

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is traditionally treated in hospital. Growing evidence from non randomized prospective studies suggests that a substantial proportion of patients with non-massive PE might be safely treated in the outpatient setting using low molecular weight heparins. Based on this evidence, professional societies started to recommend outpatient care for selected patients with non-massive PE. Despite these recommendations, outpatient treatment of non-massive PE appears to be uncommon in clinical practice. The major barriers to PE outpatient care are, firstly, the uncertainty as how to identify low risk patients with PE who are candidates for outpatient care and secondly the lack of high quality evidence from randomized trials demonstrating the safety of PE outpatient care compared to traditional inpatient management. Also, although clinical prognostic models, echocardiography and cardiac biomarkers accurately identify low risk patients with PE in prospective studies, the benefit of risk stratification strategies based on these instruments should be demonstrated in prospective management studies and clinical trials before they can be implemented as decision aids to guide PE outpatient treatment. Before high quality evidence documenting the safety of an outpatient treatment approach is published, outpatient management of non-massive PE cannot be generally recommended.

Nonthrombotic pulmonary embolism.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this essay is to highlight the clinical features and imaging findings associated with different types of nonthrombotic pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: Nonthrombotic pulmonary embolism is an infrequent condition with various causes that can be life-threatening pathologic conditions. The entity presents a diagnostic challenge because of the low specificity of clinical symptoms and imaging signs. Awareness of the imaging features of nonthrombotic pulmonary embolism facilitates correct diagnosis and leads to appropriate patient care.

Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism by multidetector CT alone or combined with venous ultrasonography of the leg: a randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Multislice CT (MSCT) combined with D-dimer measurement can safely exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with a low or intermediate clinical probability of this disease. We compared this combination with a strategy in which both a negative venous ultrasonography of the leg and MSCT were needed to exclude pulmonary embolism. METHODS: We included 1819 consecutive outpatients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism in a multicentre non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing two strategies: clinical probability assessment and either D-dimer measurement and MSCT (DD-CT strategy [n=903]) or D-dimer measurement, venous compression ultrasonography of the leg, and MSCT (DD-US-CT strategy [n=916]). Randomisation was by computer-generated blocks with stratification according to centre. Patients with a high clinical probability according to the revised Geneva score and a negative work-up for pulmonary embolism were further investigated in both groups. The primary outcome was the 3-month thromboembolic risk in patients who were left untreated on the basis of the exclusion of pulmonary embolism by diagnostic strategy. Clinicians assessing outcome were blinded to group assignment. Analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00117169. FINDINGS: The prevalence of pulmonary embolism was 20.6% in both groups (189 cases in DD-US-CT group and 186 in DD-CT group). We analysed 855 patients in the DD-US-CT group and 838 in the DD-CT group per protocol. The 3-month thromboembolic risk was 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-1.1) in the DD-US-CT group and 0.3% (0.1-1.2) in the DD-CT group (difference 0.0% [-0.9 to 0.8]). In the DD-US-CT group, ultrasonography showed a deep-venous thrombosis in 53 (9% [7-12]) of 574 patients, and thus MSCT was not undertaken. INTERPRETATION: The strategy combining D-dimer and MSCT is as safe as the strategy using D-dimer followed by venous compression ultrasonography of the leg and MSCT for exclusion of pulmonary embolism. An ultrasound could be of use in patients with a contraindication to CT.

The pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) rule does not safely exclude pulmonary embolism.

Background: The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC) rule is a clinical diagnostic rule designed to exclude pulmonary embolism (PE) without further testing. We sought to externally validate the diagnostic performance of the PERC rule alone and combined with clinical probability assessment based on the revised Geneva score. Methods: The PERC rule was applied retrospectively to consecutive patients who presented with a clinical suspicion of PE to six emergency departments, and who were enrolled in a randomized trial of PE diagnosis. Patients who met all eight PERC criteria [PERC(-)] were considered to be at a very low risk for PE. We calculated the prevalence of PE among PERC(-) patients according to their clinical pretest probability of PE. We estimated the negative likelihood ratio of the PERC rule to predict PE. Results: Among 1675 patients, the prevalence of PE was 21.3%. Overall, 13.2% of patients were PERC(-). The prevalence of PE was 5.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.1-9.3%] among PERC(-) patients overall and 6.4% (95% CI: 3.7-10.8%) among those PERC(-) patients with a low clinical pretest probability of PE. The PERC rule had a negative likelihood ratio of 0.70 (95% CI: 0.67-0.73) for predicting PE overall, and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.38-1.06) in low-risk patients. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the PERC rule alone or even when combined with the revised Geneva score cannot safely identify very low risk patients in whom PE can be ruled out without additional testing, at least in populations with a relatively high prevalence of PE.

15-OR: Multi-phase postmortem CT angiography of pulmonary embolism: technique-related artefacts or real findings?

Multi-phase postmortem CT angiography (MPMCTA) is recognized as a valuable tool to explore the vascular system, with higher sensitivity than conventional autopsy. However, a limitation is the impossibility to diagnose pulmonary embolism (PE) due to post-mortem blood clots situated in pulmonary arteries. The purpose of this study was to explore an eventual possibility to distinguish between real PE and artefacts mimicking PE. Our study included 416 medico-legal cases. All of them underwent MPMCTA, conventional autopsy and histological examination. We selected cases presenting arterial luminal filling defects in the pulmonary arteries. Their radiological interpretation was confronted to the one of autopsy and histological examination. We also investigated an eventual correlation between artefacts in pulmonary arteries and those in other parts of the vascular system. In 123 cases, filling defects of pulmonary arteries were described during MPMCTA. In 57 cases, this was interpreted as artefact and in 4 cases as suspected PE. In 62 cases only a differential diagnosis was made. Autopsy and histology could clearly identify the artefacts as such. Only one case of real PE was radiologically misinterpreted as artefact. In 6 of the 62 cases with no interpretation a PE was diagnosed. In 3 out of 4 suspected cases, PE was confirmed. We found out that filling defects in pulmonary arteries are nearly always associated to other vascular artefacts. Therefore, we suggest following some rules for radiological interpretation in order to allow a reliable diagnosis of pulmonary embolism after MPMCTA.

Exclusion of pulmonary embolism using C-reactive protein and D-dimer. A prospective comparison.

Our goal was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of C-reactive protein (CRP) alone or combined with clinical probability assessment in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE), and to compare its performance to a D-dimer assay. We conducted a prospective study in which we performed a common immuno-turbidimetric CRP test and a rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) D-dimer test in 259 consecutive outpatients with suspected PE at the emergency department of a teaching hospital. We assessed clinical probability of PE by a validated prediction rule overridden by clinical judgment. Patients with D-dimer levels &gt; or = 500 microg/l underwent a work-up consisting of lower-limb venous ultrasound, spiral computerized tomography, ventilation-perfusion scan, or pulmonary angiography. Patients were followed up for three months. Seventy-seven (30%) of the patients had PE. The CRP alone had a sensitivity of 84% (95% confidence interval [CI).: 74 to 92%) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 87% (95% CI: 78 to 93%) at a cutpoint of 5 mg/l. Overall, 61 (24%) patients with a low clinical probability of PE had a CRP &lt; 5 mg/l. Due to the low prevalence of PE (9%) in this subgroup, the NPV increased to 97% (95% CI: 89 to 100%). The D-dimer (cutpoint 500 micro g/l) showed a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 95 to 100%) and a NPV of 100% (95% CI: 94 to 100%) irrespective of clinical probability and accurately rule out PE in 56 (22%) patients. Standard CRP tests alone or combined with clinical probability assessment cannot safely exclude PE.