Early decision‐making in acute pulmonary embolism: a retrospective clinical audit

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence supporting early discharge of patients with acute pulmonary embolism (aPE) deemed 'low prognostic risk' as a safe and viable alternative to admission if identified correctly by guideline algorithms. AIM: To determine if risk stratification guidelines were followed accurately in an Australian tertiary hospital. METHODS: Patients admitted to the emergency department with a diagnosis of PE were included from December 2012 to December 2017. The 272 patients were retrospectively assessed for prognostic risk prior to and after release of the 2014 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines. This included the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (sPESI), and evidence of right heart dysfunction. Thereafter, patients were dichotomised into low (i.e. sPESI = 0) and non-low (i.e. sPESI ≥1 with or without the evidence of right heart dysfunction) prognostic risk groups. RESULTS: Prior to ESC guideline release, 52 (65%) of the 80 patients diagnosed with PE were non-low risk and 12 (23%) of these were discharged home; 11 (91.7%) of the 12 discharges had unrecognised sPESI medical history components. After ESC guideline release, 122 (63.5%) of the 192 patients were non-low risk and 20 (16.4%) of these were discharged home; 18 (90%) of the 20 discharges had unrecognised sPESI medical history components. CONCLUSION: We found that the sPESI score is not adequately applied in determining prognostic risk for acute PE. In cases of non-low-risk discharge, both prior to and after ESC guideline release, the medical history components of the sPESI score are under-recognised as a marker of increased prognostic risk.