PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 23, 2020European Journal of Internal Medicine25 citationsOpen Access

Definition of tachycardia for risk stratification of pulmonary embolism

LHLukas HobohmCBCecilia BecattiniMEMatthias Ebner

Key Points

  • To evaluate the prognostic accuracy of different heart rate cutoffs for defining tachycardia in normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism.
  • Post-hoc analysis of 1,567 consecutive normotensive patients with confirmed pulmonary embolism across single-center and multicenter registries.

Structured PICO

Does a heart rate threshold of ≥100 bpm vs ≥110 bpm better predict adverse outcomes in normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism?

P
Population
1567 normotensive patients with confirmed acute pulmonary embolism, median age 72, 46.1% female.
I
Intervention
Heart rate threshold of ≥100 bpm or ≥110 bpm for defining tachycardia
C
Comparator
Heart rate <100 bpm
O
Outcome
In-hospital adverse outcome (composite of PE-related death, need for mechanical ventilation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation or administration of catecholamines)composite

Defining tachycardia as a heart rate ≥100 bpm is sufficient for risk stratification in normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism, with no added benefit from using higher thresholds like ≥110 bpm.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tachycardia is a reliable predictor of adverse outcomes in normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). However, different prognostic relevant heart rate thresholds have been proposed. The aim of the study was to investigate the prognostic performance of different thresholds used for defining tachycardia in normotensive PE patients. METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of normotensive patients with confirmed PE consecutively included in a single-centre and a multi-centre registry. An adverse outcome was defined as PE-related death, need for mechanical ventilation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation or administration of catecholamines. RESULTS: Of 1567 patients (median age: 72 IQR, 59-79 years; females: 46.1%) included in the analysis, 78 patients (5.0%) had an in-hospital adverse outcome. The rate of an adverse outcome was higher in patients with a heart rate ≥100 bpm (7.6%) and ≥110 bpm (8.3%) compared to patients with a heart rate <100 bpm (3.0%). A heart rate ≥100 bpm and ≥110 bpm was associated with a 2.7 (95% CI 1.7-4.3) and 2.4-fold (95% CI 1.5-3.7) increased risk for an adverse outcome, respectively. Receiver operating characteristics analysis revealed a similar area under the curve with regard to an adverse outcome for all scores and algorithm (ESC 2019 algorithm, modified FAST and Bova score) if calculated with a heart rate threshold of ≥100 bpm or of ≥110 bpm. CONCLUSIONS: Defining tachycardia by a heart rate ≥100 bpm is sufficient for risk stratification of normotensive patients with acute PE. The use of different heart rate thresholds for calculation of scores and algorithm does not appear necessary.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hobohm et al. (2020) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a907a1dc63bb9fb07dd9321https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2020.08.009
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper