Systolic blood pressure range in patients with intermediate- to high-risk pulmonary embolism undergoing advanced treatment: a systematic review

Background: Despite continuous advances in management over the last two decades for pulmonary embolism (PE), treating intermediate- to high-risk PE remains challenging. There is a critical need to expand our understanding of the clinical spectrum beyond systolic blood pressure (SBP) to inform the intricate decision-making process for initiating advanced treatment in patients with intermediate- to high-risk PE. Objectives: We aimed to characterize the range of SBP values in patients with intermediate- to high-risk PE undergoing advanced therapy across different clinical settings. The secondary objective included the incidence of bleeding complications (intracranial, major, and minor). Design: We conducted a systematic review in alignment with PRISMA guidelines. The review involves a comprehensive, structured search of multiple electronic databases. Data sources and methods: We created two groups: Group 1, case reports and series, and Group 2, randomized control trials and cohorts with intermediate-risk PE who underwent advanced treatment. In addition, we performed an exploratory analysis in Group 1, created solely for descriptive purposes, to determine the frequency of the previously mentioned impending deterioration factors in the literature and further clarify their potential role in initiating advanced treatment. Results: We identified 1871 intermediate-high risk PE patients who received advanced therapy, divided into two groups: Group 1 for case reports and series, and Group 2 for randomized controlled trials and cohorts. In total, 77.1% reported SBP; the weighted average was 125.8 and 129.2 mmHg for Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The most common initial clinical presentations were dyspnea, syncope, and chest pain. In the exploratory analysis, we found that borderline SBP (110–120 mmHg), right ventricular dysfunction, and heart rate (⩾120 bpm) were the most frequent impending clinical deterioration factors. Conclusion: This systematic review shows that the SBP range for advanced treatment (129.2 and 125.8 mmHg) aligns with previous clinical models. However, it is important to recognize that while these SBP ranges may suggest practice variation, causality or definitive clinical instability cannot be inferred from aggregate data without patient-level outcomes. Outside of randomized controlled trials, clinical decision-making regarding advanced treatment may not fully align with international recommendations in real-world scenarios. Trial registration: Research Registry number: 2065.