Abstract Rationale The Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) is a multidisciplinary model to optimize the care for patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). PERT primarily guides the treatment of patients with intermediate or high-risk PE - weighing up the risks and benefits of catheter-directed therapy (CDT) versus medical management. Existing guidelines provide general frameworks for follow-up; published data on post-PE surveillance remains limited, particularly in community-based tertiary care centers. Our retrospective study aims to address this gap by quantifying post-CDT and systemic thrombolysis follow-up rates at one and three months. Methods Adult patients (≥18 years) admitted for acute PE who underwent CDT and/or received systemic thrombolysis between 3/01/2021 - 3/31/2025 were identified from our PERT registry. Demographics, presenting features, interventions, and follow-up at one and three months were descriptively analyzed. Results A study population of 129 patients was identified (mean age = 62 years, 50.4% female, 48.8% male, 0.8% other). Dyspnea was the predominant presenting symptom (95.4%), with tachycardia (74.4%) and tachypnea (69.8%) being the most frequent clinical signs. Most patients were classified as intermediate-high risk (57.4%), followed by high risk (35.7%) and intermediate-low risk (7.0%). CDT was the most common intervention (aspiration thrombectomy n = 65 and catheter-directed thrombolysis n = 39); 25 patients underwent systemic thrombolysis. At one and three months, 58.1% (n = 75) and 48.1% (n = 48) of patients presented for follow-up, respectively. Of the 75 (58.1%) patients seen at one month, 53 (70.7%) continued to three-month follow-up, while 22 (29.3%) were lost. Among the 54 (41.9%) patients who did not follow up at one month, only 9 returned at three months (16.7%), leaving 45 (34.9%) with no documented follow-up. Conclusions Follow-up of patients with acute PE treated with CDT and/or systemic thrombolysis was suboptimal. Although 65% of patients had at least one outpatient follow-up within three months of discharge, over one-third of patients had no documented surveillance despite receiving advanced therapies. Our data suggests that patients seen at one month are more likely to remain engaged in care, supporting the utility of short-interval follow-up. Our descriptive analysis addresses a gap in post-PE care, particularly in smaller, tertiary community hospitals. Challenges present in this area include fragmentation of care, limited understanding of post-PE syndromes, and the logistics/resources required to facilitate follow-up. Next steps include PERT-led quality improvement projects, clinical trials such as PE-TRACT investigating the long-term outcomes of CDT, and advocacy for stepwise follow-up structures to investigate persistent dyspnea and post-PE syndromes. This abstract is funded by: None
Mitchell et al. (Fri,) studied this question.