This review provides a comprehensive overview of the definitions, risk stratification, management approaches, and the role of multidisciplinary response teams in treating submassive pulmonary embolism.
Multidisciplinary PE teams may reduce care delays in submassive cases; leaves open optimal escalation thresholds pending prospective trials.
Pulmonary embolism (PE) presents a spectrum of hemodynamic consequences, ranging from being asymptomatic to a life-threatening medical emergency. Management of submassive and massive PE often involves clinicians from multiple specialties, which can potentially delay the development of a unified treatment plan. In addition, patients with submassive PE can deteriorate after their presentation and require escalation of care. Underlying comorbidities such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, congestive heart failure, and interstitial lung disease can impact the patient's hemodynamic ability to tolerate submassive PE. In this review, we address the definitions, risk stratification (clinical, laboratory, and imaging), management approaches, and long-term outcomes of submassive PE. We also discuss the role of the PE response team in management of patients with PE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rali et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: