Why the study?
Evidence is lacking regarding the clinical relevance and safety of initial therapies in hemodynamically stable patients presenting with intermediate-to-severe submassive pulmonary embolism.
Is fluid volume administration associated with adverse outcomes in patients with submassive pulmonary embolism?
Is fluid volume administration associated with adverse outcomes in patients with submassive pulmonary embolism?
In patients with submassive pulmonary embolism, increased fluid volume administration is associated with a higher likelihood of adverse events.
May warrant caution with fluid volume in submassive PE; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
The majority of patients with intermediate-to-severe submassive pulmonary embolism are hemodynamically stable upon presentation. There is a lack of evidence for the clinical relevance and safety of initially employed therapies in this population. The objective of current analysis was to determine predictors associated with adverse outcomes in submassive pulmonary embolism patients. This was a single-center, retrospective chart review identifying patient characteristics and clinical factors associated with adverse outcomes within the management of patients presenting to the emergency department for submassive pulmonary embolism. A total of 122 admissions for submassive pulmonary embolism were included. Among these patients, 41% (n = 50) of admissions had an adverse outcomes. Fluid volume was associated with adverse events in an incremental manner (odds ratio 2.1, 95% confidence interval, 1.4-3.2). These findings demonstrate a significant incidence of adverse events in patients with submassive pulmonary embolism and an incremental increase in likelihood of adverse events with each liter of fluid.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: