This review summarizes modern risk-based therapeutic guidelines for acute pulmonary embolism, highlighting the role of risk stratification and appropriate use of thrombolysis and anticoagulants.
Aids risk-stratified PE management in practice; leaves open need for updated RCTs on thrombolysis thresholds.
UNLABELLED: Risk evaluation and prognostic stratification based upon clinical and radiological findings and new cardiac biomarkers, such as natriuretic peptides (NP) and troponins, represent key points in modern management of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Literature evidence shows that normotensive PE with right heart dysfunction (RHD), defined as submassive PE, has poorer prognosis when compared to normotensive PE without RHD, defined as non-massive PE; thus whether submassive PE should be managed more aggressively and with closer monitoring represents the crucial question about acute PE treatment. Although the answer is yet unclear, the most recent guidelines address to thrombolysis as treatment choice in selected high risk patients with submassive PE. Guidelines also clarify the indications for unfractioned and low molecular weight heparins and fondaparinux. Therefore, in the present article, the authors focus on modern risk-based therapeutic guidelines of acute PE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Luca Masotti (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: