Identifying right ventricle (RV) abnormalities is important to stratifying pulmonary embolism (PE) severity. Disposition decisions are influenced by concerns about early deterioration. Triaging strategies, like the Simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (sPESI), do not include RV assessments as predictors or early deterioration as outcome(s). We aimed to (1) determine if RV assessment variables add prognostic accuracy for 5‐day clinical deterioration in patients classified low risk by sPESI, and (2) determine the prognostic importance of RV assessments compared to other variables and to each other.

Can right ventricular assessments improve triaging of low risk pulmonary embolism?

We sought to determine associations of early electrocardiogram (ECG) patterns with clinical deterioration (CD) within 5 days and with RV abnormality (abnlRV) by echocardiography in pulmonary embolism (PE).

Electrocardiographic findings associated with early clinical deterioration in acute pulmonary embolism

Current strategies for the evaluation of patients with chest pain have significantly changed thanks to the implemented potentiality of CT and MRI. The possible fatal consequences and high malpractice costs of missed acute coronary syndromes lead to unnecessary hospital admissions every year. CT provides consistent diagnostic support, mainly in suspected coronary disease in patients with a low or intermediate pre-test risk. Moreover, it can gain information in the case of cardiac involvement in pulmonary vascular obstructive disease. MRI, on the other hand, has a leading role in the condition of myocardial damage irrespective of the underlying inflammatory or stress related etiology. This article discusses how radiology techniques (CT and MRI) can impact the diagnostic workflow of the most common cardiac and vascular pathologies that are responsible for non-traumatic chest pain admissions to the Emergency Department.

/pdf/role-of-ct-and-mri-in-cardiac-emergencies-9ff1c104.pdf

Role of CT and MRI in Cardiac Emergencies

Abstract Background We determine the predictive value of transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) metrics for clinical deterioration within 5 days in adults with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE). Methods This was a prospective observational study of intermediate-risk PE patients. To determine associations of TTE and clinical predictors with clinical deterioration, we used univariable analysis, Youden’s index for optimal thresholds, and multivariable analyses to report odds ratios (ORs) or area under the curve (AUC). Results Of 306 intermediate-risk PE patients, 115 (37.6%) experienced clinical deterioration. PE patients who had clinical deterioration within 5 days had greater baseline right ventricle (RV) dilatation and worse systolic function than the group without clinical deterioration as indicated by the following: RV basal diameter 4.46 ± 0.77 versus 4.20 ± 0.77 cm; RV/LV basal width ratio 1.14 ± 0.29 versus 1.02 ± 0.24; tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) 1.56 ± 0.55 versus 1.80 ± 0.52 cm; and RV systolic excursion velocity 10.40 ± 3.58 versus 12.1 ± 12.5 cm/s, respectively. Optimal thresholds for predicting clinical deterioration were: RV basal width 3.9 cm (OR 2.85 [1.64, 4.97]), RV-to-left ventricle (RV/LV) ratio 1.08 (OR 3.32 [2.07, 5.33]), TAPSE 1.98 cm (OR 3.3 [2.06, 5.3]), systolic excursion velocity 10.10 cm/s (OR 2.85 [1.75, 4.63]), and natriuretic peptide 190 pg/mL (OR 2.89 [1.81, 4.62]). Significant independent predictors were: transient hypotension 6.1 (2.2, 18.9), highest heart rate 1.02 (1.00, 1.03), highest respiratory rate 1.02 (1.00, 1.04), and RV/LV ratio 1.29 (1.14, 1.47). By logistic regression and random forest analyses, AUCs were 0.80 (0.73, 0.87) and 0.78 (0.70, 0.85), respectively. Conclusions Basal RV, RV/LV ratio, and RV systolic function measurements were significantly different between intermediate-risk PE patients grouped by subsequent clinical deterioration. 

/pdf/intermediate-risk-pulmonary-embolism-echocardiography-2gfa2thj.pdf

Intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism: echocardiography predictors of clinical deterioration

Existing pulmonary embolism (PE) risk scores were developed to predict death within weeks, but not more proximate adverse events. We determined the ability of 3 PE risk stratification tools (simplified pulmonary embolism severity index [sPESI], 2019 European Society of Cardiology guidelines [ESC], and PE short‐term clinical outcomes risk estimation [PE‐SCORE]) to predict 5‐day clinical deterioration after emergency department (ED) diagnosis of PE.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/emp2.12983

Comparing predictive performance of pulmonary embolism risk stratification tools for acute clinical deterioration

OBJECTIVE Develop and validate a prognostic model for clinical deterioration or death within days of pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis using point-of-care criteria. METHODS We used prospective registry data from six emergency departments. The primary composite outcome was death or deterioration (respiratory failure, cardiac arrest, new dysrhythmia, sustained hypotension, and rescue reperfusion intervention) within 5 days. Candidate predictors included laboratory and imaging right ventricle (RV) assessments. The prognostic model was developed from 935 PE patients. Univariable analysis of 138 candidate variables was followed by penalized and standard logistic regression on 26 retained variables, and then tested with a validation database (N = 801). RESULTS Logistic regression yielded a nine-variable model, then simplified to a nine-point tool (PE-SCORE): one point each for abnormal RV by echocardiography, abnormal RV by computed tomography, systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg, dysrhythmia, suspected/confirmed systemic infection, syncope, medico-social admission reason, abnormal heart rate, and two points for creatinine greater than 2.0 mg/dL. In the development database, 22.4% had the primary outcome. Prognostic accuracy of logistic regression model versus PE-SCORE model: 0.83 (0.80, 0.86) vs. 0.78 (0.75, 0.82) using area under the curve (AUC) and 0.61 (0.57, 0.64) vs. 0.50 (0.39, 0.60) using precision-recall curve (AUCpr). In the validation database, 26.6% had the primary outcome. PE-SCORE had AUC 0.77 (0.73, 0.81) and AUCpr 0.63 (0.43, 0.81). As points increased, outcome proportions increased: a score of zero had 2% outcome, whereas scores of six and above had ≥ 69.6% outcomes. In the validation dataset, PE-SCORE zero had 8% outcome [no deaths], whereas all patients with PE-SCORE of six and above had the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS PE-SCORE model identifies PE patients at low- and high-risk for deterioration and may help guide decisions about early outpatient management versus need for hospital-based monitoring.

Jillian Davison

Papers

Development and validation of a prognostic tool: Pulmonary embolism short-term clinical outcomes risk estimation (PE-SCORE)