PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 12, 2020Kardiologia Polska22 citationsOpen Access

Implementation of a regional multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team: PERT-POZ initial 1-year experience

SSSylwia Sławek-SzmytSJStanisław JankiewiczASAnna Smukowska-Gorynia

Structured PICO

Does a multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) facilitate optimal management and favorable clinical outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism?

P
Population
80 patients with confirmed pulmonary embolism (PE) managed at a university care center, including 11.25% low-risk, 23.75% intermediate-low risk, 47.5% intermediate-high risk, and 17.5% high-risk PE.
I
Intervention
Management guided by a multidisciplinary Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT-POZ).
O
Outcome
Patient characteristics, therapies, and clinical outcomes (including in-hospital mortality, 3-month mortality, and bleeding complications).hard clinical

Implementation of a multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) facilitated optimal treatment strategies with low rates of major bleeding and mortality in a cohort with predominantly intermediate- and high-risk PE.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most common potentially life‑threatening cardiovascular disease. A new approach of pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) has been introduced to provide rapid multidisciplinary assessment and treatment of patients with PE. However, detailed data on institutional experience and clinical outcomes from such teams are missing. AIMS: The aim of this study was to report our experience with the management of PE guided by the PERT-POZ within the first year of operation. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of PERT-POZ activations at a university care center between October 2018 and October 2019. Patient characteristics, therapies, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 86 unique PERT-POZ activations, and PE was confirmed in 80 patients including: 9 patients (11.25%) classified as low‑risk PE, 19 (23.75%) as intermediate‑low risk, 38 (47.5%) as intermediate‑high, and 14 (17.5%) as high‑risk. Sixty patients (75%) received anticoagulation only, 28 (35%) direct oral anticoagulant, 7 (8.75%) vitamin K antagonist, 23 (28.75%) low-molecular-weight heparin, and 2 (2.50%) unfractionated heparin. Ten patients (12.5%) were treated with catheter‑directed thrombectomy, 6 (7.5%) received systemic thrombolysis, 2 (2.5%) underwent surgical embolectomy, 2 (2.5%) were on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, and 2 (2.5%) underwent pharmacomechanical venous thrombectomy. There were 7 (8.75%) in‑hospital deaths, and 2 (2.5%) deaths during a 3‑month follow‑up. Bleeding complications were rare: only 3 patients (3.75%) had major bleeding events, but none after administration of systemic thrombolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that after the creation of PERT-POZ with a precise activation protocol, patients with intermediate and high‑risk PE received most optimal treatment strategies.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sławek-Szmyt et al. (2020) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7180b7ac440176ef2a2d8fhttps://doi.org/10.33963/kp.15230
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper