Predictors and potential advantages of PERT and advanced therapy use in acute pulmonary embolism.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to examine predictors of pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) utilization and identify those who could benefit from advanced therapy. BACKGROUND: PERT and advanced therapy use remain low. Current risk stratification tools heavily weight age and comorbidities, which may not always correlate with presentation's severity. METHODS: We prospectively studied patients with CT-confirmed PE between January 2019 and December 2019 at our hospital. PERT activation was left to the treating physician. Multivariable analyses were utilized to identify predictors of PERT activation and advanced therapy. Using the log odd ratio of each significant predictor of advanced therapy, we created a scoring system and a score of 2 was associated with the highest use. Primary outcomes were 30- and 90-day all-cause mortality, readmission, and major bleed. RESULTS: Of the 307 patients, PERT was activated in 22.5%. While abnormal vital signs and right ventricular (RV) strain were associated with PERT activation, pulmonary embolism severity index (PESI) was not. Advanced therapy use was significantly higher in the PERT cohort (35% vs 2%). Predictors of advanced therapy use were composite variable (heart rate > 110 or systolic blood pressure < 100 or respiratory rate > 30 or oxygen saturation < 90%) and right-to-left ventricular ratio > 0.9. PERT patients with advanced therapy use, when compared to the no-PERT patients who could have qualified (score of 2), had significantly lower 30- and 90-day mortality and 30-day readmission without difference in major bleed. CONCLUSION: PERT has important therapeutic impact, yet no guidelines to direct activation. We recommend a multidisciplinary approach for higher acuity pulmonary embolism cases and physician education regarding PERT and the scope of advanced therapy use.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on ST-elevation myocardial infarction in a non-COVID-19 epicenter.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to study the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the presentation delay, severity, patterns of care, and reasons for delay among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in a non-hot-spot region. BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has significantly reduced the activations for STEMI in epicenters like Spain. METHODS: From January 1, 2020, to April 15, 2020, 143 STEMIs were identified across our integrated 18-hospital system. Pre- and post-COVID-19 cohorts were based on March 23rd, 2020, whenstay-at-home orders were initiated in Ohio. We used presenting heart rate, blood pressure, troponin, new Q-wave, and left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) to assess severity. Duration of intensive care unit stay, total length of stay, door-to-balloon (D2B) time, and radial versus femoral access were used to assess patterns of care. RESULTS: Post-COVID-19 presentation was associated with a lower admission LVEF (45 vs. 50%, p = .015), new Q-wave, and higher initial troponin; however, these did not reach statistical significance. Among post-COVID-19 patients, those with >12-hr delay in presentation 31(%) had a longer average D2B time (88 vs. 53 min, p = .033) and higher peak troponin (58 vs. 8.5 ng/ml, p = .03). Of these, 27% avoided the hospital due to fear of COVID-19, 18% believed symptoms were COVID-19 related, and 9% did not want to burden the hospital during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has remarkably affected STEMI presentation and care. Patients' fear and confusion about symptoms are integral parts of this emerging public health crisis.

Greater Number of Plasma Exchanges Does Not Improve Outcome in Myasthenic Crisis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the relationship between the number of plasma exchanges and clinical outcome in patients experiencing myasthenic crisis. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all episodes of myasthenia gravis exacerbation/crisis who received plasmapheresis in patients admitted to a single-center tertiary care referral center from July 2008 to July 2017. We performed statistical analyses to determine whether the increased number of plasma exchanges improves the primary outcome (hospital length of stay) and the secondary outcome (disposition to home, skilled nursing facility, long-term acute care hospital, or death). RESULTS: There is neither clinically observable nor statistically significant improvement in length of stay or disposition on discharge in patients who received 6 or greater sessions of plasmapheresis. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides class IV evidence that extending the number of plasma exchanges beyond 5 does not correlate with decreased hospital length of stay or improved discharge disposition in patients experiencing myasthenic crisis.

Prospective Experience of Pulmonary Embolism Management and Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the impact of pulmonary embolism (PE) response teams (PERTs) on all consecutive patients with PE. BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary PERTs have been promoted for the management and treatment of (PE); however, the impact of PERTs on clinical outcomes has not been prospectively evaluated. METHODS: We prospectively studied 220 patients with computed tomography (CT)-confirmed PE between January, 2019 and August, 2019. Baseline characteristics, as well as medical, interventional, and operational care, were captured. The total population was divided into 2 groups, ie, those with PERT activation and those without PERT activation. PERT activation was left at the discretion of the primary team. Our primary outcome was 90-day composite endpoint (rate of readmission, major bleeds, and mortality). Using 2:1 propensity-matched and multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazard analyses, we examined the impact of PERT activation on primary outcome, treatment approach, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of the total 220 patients, PERT was activated in 47 (21.4%). The PERT cohort, as compared with the non-PERT cohort, was more likely to present with dyspnea, syncope, lower systolic blood pressure, higher heart rate, higher respiratory rate, lower oxygen saturation, higher troponin levels, and higher right ventricular to left ventricular ratio. PERT activation was associated with increased use of advanced therapies (36.2% vs 1.2%; P<.001) and catheter-directed inventions (25.5% vs 0.6%; P<.001). In multivariable-adjusted analysis of propensity-matched cohorts, PERT activation was associated with lower 90-day outcomes (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.75; P<.01). CONCLUSION: At our institution, PERT had a clinically significant impact on therapeutic strategies and 90-day outcomes in patients with PE.