Acute phase characteristics and long-term complications of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 cohort: a large single-centre study.

BACKGROUND: To compare the severity of pulmonary embolism (PE) and the long-term complications between patients with and without COVID-19, and to investigate whether the tools for risk stratification of death are valid in this population. METHODS: We retrospectively included hospitalized patients with PE from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2022. Comparisons for acute episode characteristics, risk stratification of the PE, outcomes, and long-term complications were made between COVID and non-COVID patients. RESULTS: We analyzed 116 (27.5%) COVID patients and 305 (72.4%) non-COVID patients. In patients with COVID-19, the traditional risk factors for PE were absent, and the incidence of deep vein thrombosis was lower. COVID patients showed significantly higher lymphocyte count, lactate dehydrogenase, lactic acid, and D-dimer levels. COVID patients had PE of smaller size (12.3% vs. 25.5% main pulmonary artery, 29.8% vs. 37.1% lobar, 44.7% vs. 29.5% segmental and 13.2% vs. 7.9% subsegmental, respectively; p < 0.001), less right ventricular dysfunction (7.7% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.007) and higher sPESI score (1.66 vs. 1.11; p < 0.001). The need for mechanical ventilation was significantly higher in COVID patients (8.6% vs. 1.3%; p < 0.001); However, the in-hospital death was less (5.2% vs. 10.8%; p = 0.074). The incidence of long-term complications was lower in COVID cohort (p < 0.001). PE severity assessed by high sPESI and intermediate and high-risk categories were independently associated with in-hospital mortality in COVID patients. CONCLUSION: The risk of in-hospital mortality and the incidence of long-term complications were lower in COVID-19. The usual tools for risk stratification of PE are valid in COVID patients.

[Utility of probability scores for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review]. / Utilidad de las escalas de predicción diagnósticas de embolia de pulmón en pacientes con infección por SARS-CoV-2: una revisión sistemática.

Background and objective: Clinical prediction models determine the pre-test probability of pulmonary embolism (PE) and assess the need for tests for these patients. Coronavirus infection is associated with a greater risk of PE, increasing its severity and conferring a worse prognosis. The pathogenesis of PE appears to be different in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. This systematic review aims to discover the utility of probability models developed for PE in patients with COVID-19 by reviewing the available literature. Methods: A literature search on the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases was carried out. All studies that reported data on the use of clinical prediction models for PE in patients with COVID-19 were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized studies. Results: Thirteen studies that evaluated five prediction models (Wells score, Geneva score, YEARS algorithm, and PERC and PEGeD clinical decision rules) were included. The different scales were used in 1,187 patients with COVID-19. Overall, the models showed limited predictive ability. The two-level Wells score with low (or unlikely) clinical probability in combination with a D-dimer level < 3000 ng/mL or a normal bedside lung ultrasound showed an adequate correlation for ruling out PE. Conclusions: Our systematic review suggests that the clinical prediction models available for PE that were developed in the general population are not applicable to patients with COVID-19. Therefore, their use is in clinical practice as the only diagnostic screening tool is not recommended. New clinical probability models for PE that are validated in these patients are needed.

Incidence of pulmonary embolism in non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. Predicting factors for a challenging diagnosis.

Recent studies suggest that thrombotic complications are a common phenomenon in the novel SARS-CoV-2 infection. The main objective of our study is to assess cumulative incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in non critically ill COVID-19 patients and to identify its predicting factors associated to the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. We retrospectevely reviewed 452 electronic medical records of patients admitted to Internal Medicine Department of a secondary hospital in Madrid during Covid 19 pandemic outbreak. We included 91 patients who underwent a multidetector Computed Tomography pulmonary angiography(CTPA) during conventional hospitalization. The cumulative incidence of PE was assessed ant the clinical, analytical and radiological characteristics were compared between patients with and without PE. PE incidence was 6.4% (29/452 patients). Most patients with a confirmed diagnosed with PE recieved low molecular weight heparin (LMWH): 79.3% (23/29). D-dimer peak was significatly elevated in PE vs non PE patients (14,480 vs 7230 mcg/dL, p = 0.03). In multivariate analysis of patients who underwent a CTPA we found that plasma D-dimer peak was an independen predictor of PE with a best cut off point of > 5000 µg/dl (OR 3.77; IC95% (1.18-12.16), p = 0.03). We found ninefold increased risk of PE patients not suffering from dyslipidemia (OR 9.06; IC95% (1.88-43.60). Predictive value of AUC for ROC is 75.5%. We found a high incidence of PE in non critically ill hospitalized COVID 19 patients despite standard thromboprophylaxis. An increase in D-dimer levels is an independent predictor for PE, with a best cut-off point of > 5000 µg/ dl.

Systematic review of clinical trials on antithrombotic therapy with factor XI inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Data from phase 2 clinical trials suggest that factor XI inhibitors may exhibit a more favorable efficacy/safety profile compared to current antithrombotic therapies. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the available evidence derived from these studies. METHODS: A literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, EMBASE databases, and clinical trial registration platforms Clinical Trials and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled was conducted. In accordance with the PRISMA statement, results were reported. RESULTS: A total of 18 completed or ongoing clinical trials addressing multiple scenarios, including atrial fibrillation, stroke, myocardial infarction, and venous thromboembolism, were identified. Evidence from 8 studies with available results was analyzed. Phase 2 studies with factor XI inhibitors, overall, demonstrated an acceptable efficacy and safety profile. The benefit-risk balance, in terms of reducing venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, was more favorable. For this scenario, factor XI inhibitors showed a 50% reduction in the overall rate of thrombotic complications and a 60% reduction in the rate of bleeding compared to enoxaparin. Modest results in studies involving patients with atrial fibrillation, stroke, and myocardial infarction were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Factor XI inhibitors offer new prospects in antithrombotic treatment and prophylaxis. Ongoing phase 3 studies will help define the most suitable drugs and indications.

Diagnosis and treatment of deep vein thrombosis of the lower and upper limbs. 2024 recommendations of the venous thromboembolism group of the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine.

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the limbs is a common disease and causes significant morbidity and mortality. It is frequently the prelude to pulmonary embolism (PE), it can recur in 30% of patients and in 25-40% of cases they can develop post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), with a significant impact in functional status and quality of life. This document contains the recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of acute DVT from the Thromboembolic Disease group of the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI). PE and thrombosis of unusual venous territories (cerebral, renal, mesenteric, superficial, etc.) are outside its scope, as well as thrombosis associated with catheter and thrombosis associated with cancer, which due to their peculiarities will be the subject of other positioning documents of the Thromboembolic Disease group of the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI).

Utility of probability scores for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Clinical prediction models determine the pre-test probability of pulmonary embolism (PE) and assess the need for tests for these patients. Coronavirus infection is associated with a greater risk of PE, increasing its severity and conferring a worse prognosis. The pathogenesis of PE appears to be different in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. This systematic review aims to discover the utility of probability models developed for PE in patients with COVID-19 by reviewing the available literature. METHODS: A literature search on the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases was carried out. All studies that reported data on the use of clinical prediction models for PE in patients with COVID-19 were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized studies. RESULTS: Thirteen studies that evaluated five prediction models (Wells score, Geneva score, YEARS algorithm, and PERC and PEGeD clinical decision rules) were included. The different scales were used in 1,187 patients with COVID-19. Overall, the models showed limited predictive ability. The two-level Wells score with low (or unlikely) clinical probability in combination with a D-dimer level <3000ng/mL or a normal bedside lung ultrasound showed an adequate correlation for ruling out PE. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review suggests that the clinical prediction models available for PE that were developed in the general population are not applicable to patients with COVID-19. Therefore, their use is in clinical practice as the only diagnostic screening tool is not recommended. New clinical probability models for PE that are validated in these patients are needed.

Clinical ultrasonography in venous thromboembolism disease. / Ecografía clínica en la enfermedad tromboembólica venosa.

The use of clinical ultrasonography has grown exponentially in the past decade in various medical settings. As with other areas of activity in the field of internal medicine, clinical ultrasonography has been implemented in venous thromboembolism disease, both in deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. In this review, we cover the diagnostic techniques, both for deep vein thrombosis through compression ultrasonography and for multiorgan ultrasonography, which include compression ultrasonography, pulmonary ultrasonography in the search for pulmonary infarctions and echocardiography for detecting dilation and right ventricular dysfunction for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. We also establish the most common clinical scenarios in which clinical ultrasonography can be of assistance in actual clinical practice, as well as its limitations and current evidence.

[Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with heart failure in a day hospital]. / Manejo de la insuficiencia cardíaca en pacientes ancianos a través de la implantación de un hospital de día multidisciplinar.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the utility of a day hospital managed by a multidisciplinary heart failure (HF) team composed of nurses, geriatricians and internal physicians in the reduction of hospital readmission of elderly patients with HF who are not selected by their left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 182 patients with mean age of 76 years and decompensated HP who required admission in internal medicine and geriatric wards were included. A total of 51 patients were followed up in a day hospital, where education, phone access, drug titration and use of parenteral diuretics were performed. Readmission due to HF at 3 months post-hospitalization was measured. A bivariate analysis was performed in both groups using parametrics test (p < 0.05) and a Kaplan Meier analysis using log rank. RESULTS: A total of 61% were women. Mean NYHA class was 2.75 +/- 0.44. LVEF < 45% was found in 40%. Prescription rate of beta blockers was significantly higher in the intervention group (93% vs 24%; p < 0.001) as well as ACE-inhibitors and ARB prescription rates (96% vs 72%, p = 0.002). Readmission rate due to HF in the first 90 days after discharge was lower in the intervention group (11% vs 28%; p = 0.020). HF admission free time was longer for these patient than those managed with conventional care (85.12 days versus 76; log rank; p = 0.026). DISCUSSION: Multidisciplinary intervention carried out by generalist physicians and HF nurses in a day hospital is useful to reduce HF admission in elderly patients not selected by their LVEF.