Key result
Anticoagulation anchors intermediate and high-risk PE care, reserving advanced reperfusion for deteriorating or high-risk patients.
This review highlights the importance of prompt anticoagulation and advanced reperfusion therapies, guided by multidisciplinary response teams, for managing intermediate- and high-risk pulmonary embolism.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Tailored PE management via response teams may improve outcomes; leaves open optimal advanced therapy selection.
Intermediate-risk (submassive) pulmonary embolism (PE) describes normotensive patients with evidence of right ventricular compromise, whereas high-risk (massive) PE comprises those who have experienced hemodynamic decompensation with hypotension, cardiogenic shock, or cardiac arrest. Together, these 2 syndromes represent the most clinically challenging manifestations of the PE spectrum. Prompt therapeutic anticoagulation remains the cornerstone of therapy for both intermediate- and high-risk PE. Patients with intermediate-risk PE who subsequently deteriorate despite anticoagulation and those with high-risk PE require additional advanced therapies, typically focused on pulmonary artery reperfusion. Strategies for reperfusion therapy include systemic fibrinolysis, surgical pulmonary embolectomy, and a growing number of options for catheter-based therapy. Multidisciplinary PE response teams can aid in selection of appropriate management strategies, especially where gaps in evidence exist and guideline recommendations are sparse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gregory Piazza (2020) conducted a review in Intermediate- and High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism. Prompt therapeutic anticoagulation is the cornerstone of therapy for intermediate- and high-risk pulmonary embolism, with advanced reperfusion therapies required for high-risk or deteriorating patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: