Clinical prognostic scores are critical for rapid and accurate risk stratification in acute pulmonary embolism to guide appropriate treatment strategies, including outpatient management or escalation of therapy.
Encourages validated prognostic scores to guide outpatient PE management; leaves open optimal integration pending prospective trials.
Rapid and accurate risk stratification is critical in determining the optimal treatment strategy for patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Early identification of patients with normal blood pressure and a favorable prognosis (low-risk PE) might select a subset of patients for outpatient treatment, which is associated with reduced cost and improved patient satisfaction, and has been shown to be effective and safe. Alternatively, identification of normotensive patients deemed as having a high risk for PE-related adverse clinical events (intermediate-high-risk PE) might select a subset of patients for close observation and consideration of escalation of therapy. Clinical prognostic scores have been gaining importance in the classification of patients into these categories. They should be derived and validated following strict methodological standards, and their use in clinical practice should be encouraged.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Morillo et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: