PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 9, 2026Journal of the American College of Radiology3 citationsOpen Access

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism

View Full Paper
SPSara K. PlettRadiology AssociatesNFNicholas FidelmanUniversity of California, San FranciscoMHMikhail C.S.S. HigginsCollege of The Bahamas

Key Result

The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria provide evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pulmonary embolism based on clinical risk stratification.

Key Points

  • To establish evidence-based appropriateness criteria and treatment recommendations for patients presenting with acute pulmonary embolism based on clinical risk stratification.
  • Convened an annual multidisciplinary expert panel to perform a systematic literature review across peer-reviewed medical publications.
  • Adapted Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) principles and the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to assess evidence and achieve consensus.
  • High-risk (massive) pulmonary embolism warrants rapid escalation to advanced therapies, including systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed therapies, or surgical embolectomy alongside baseline anticoagulation.
  • Intermediate-risk (submassive) cases require anticoagulation with consideration of catheter-directed therapies, whereas low-risk cases achieve clinical resolution with anticoagulation alone.
  • Identified treatment modifications for complex clinical scenarios, including presence of absolute contraindications to thrombolysis and right atrial thrombus-in-transit.

Structured PICO

P
Population
Patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE), stratified into high-risk (massive), intermediate-risk (submassive), and low-risk groups
I
Intervention
Management strategies including anticoagulation, systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed therapies, and surgical embolectomy based on clinical risk

This document provides updated ACR Appropriateness Criteria for the management of acute pulmonary embolism, tailored to patient risk stratification.

Limitations

  • In instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Abstract

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a subclass of venous thromboembolism, which can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Risk stratification algorithms classify PE into high-risk (massive), intermediate-risk (submassive), and low-risk groups, with management guidelines determined based on clinical risk. For high-risk PE, first-line treatment options may include anticoagulation, systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed therapies, and surgical embolectomy. For intermediate-risk PE, management may involve anticoagulation and catheter-directed therapies, whereas for low-risk PE, management typically involves anticoagulation alone. Special case scenarios, such as a clinical contraindication to thrombolysis or right atrial thrombus-in-transit, may require a modified treatment approach. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Expert Takes2 quotes

1/2

“Although mortality rates were low, preventing clinical deterioration remains highly relevant because it may avert rescue thrombolysis, mechanical circulatory support, intensive care utilization, and prolonged hospitalization.”

ACC Journal ScanView source
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Plett et al. (2025) conducted a review in Acute pulmonary embolism. Management guidelines was evaluated. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria provide evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pulmonary embolism based on clinical risk stratification.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa178e85f13e43af75dd267https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.08.039
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Surgical embolectomy versus thrombolytic therapy in the management of acute massive pulmonary embolism: Short and long-term prognosis2015 · 57 citations
  2. 2Prognostic importance of central thrombus in hemodynamically stable patients with pulmonary embolism2017 · 22 citations
  3. 3Acute outcomes for the full US cohort of the FLASH mechanical thrombectomy registry in pulmonary embolism2023 · 217 citations
  4. 4Ultrasound-facilitated, catheter-directed thrombolysis vs anticoagulation alone for acute intermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism: Rationale and design of the HI-PEITHO study2022 · 212 citations
  5. 5The removal of floating right heart thrombi and pulmonary embolus using AngioJet device and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a case report2022 · 8 citations