Triaging acute pulmonary embolism for home treatment by Hestia or simplified PESI criteria: the HOME-PE randomized trial.

AIMS: The aim of this study is to compare the Hestia rule vs. the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (sPESI) for triaging patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) for home treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Normotensive patients with PE of 26 hospitals from France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Switzerland were randomized to either triaging with Hestia or sPESI. They were designated for home treatment if the triaging tool was negative and if the physician-in-charge, taking into account the patient's opinion, did not consider that hospitalization was required. The main outcomes were the 30-day composite of recurrent venous thrombo-embolism, major bleeding or all-cause death (non-inferiority analysis with 2.5% absolute risk difference as margin), and the rate of patients discharged home within 24 h after randomization (NCT02811237). From January 2017 through July 2019, 1975 patients were included. In the per-protocol population, the primary outcome occurred in 3.82% (34/891) in the Hestia arm and 3.57% (32/896) in the sPESI arm (P = 0.004 for non-inferiority). In the intention-to-treat population, 38.4% of the Hestia patients (378/984) were treated at home vs. 36.6% (361/986) of the sPESI patients (P = 0.41 for superiority), with a 30-day composite outcome rate of 1.33% (5/375) and 1.11% (4/359), respectively. No recurrent or fatal PE occurred in either home treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: For triaging PE patients, the strategy based on the Hestia rule and the strategy based on sPESI had similar safety and effectiveness. With either tool complemented by the overruling of the physician-in-charge, more than a third of patients were treated at home with a low incidence of complications.

Diagnostic accuracy of copeptin sensitivity and specificity in patients with suspected non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction with troponin I below the 99th centile at presentation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether copeptin-us can rule out diagnosis of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) without prolonged monitoring and serial blood sampling in patients with high-sensitive cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) below the 99th centile at presentation to the emergency department (ED) [corrected]. DESIGN: Prospective, non-randomised, individual blinded diagnostic accuracy study. SETTING: Two EDs of a rural region of France. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with chest pain suspected of NSTEMI with onset within the last 12 h were considered for enrollment. INTERVENTIONS: Serial clinical, electrographical and biochemical investigations were performed at admission and after 2, 4, 6 and 12 h. Hs-cTnI was measured using an assay with Dimension VISTA, Siemens [corrected]. Copeptin was measured by the BRAHMS copeptin-us assay on the KRYPTOR Compact Plus system. The follow-up period was 90 days. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Copeptin, troponin, myoglobin and creatine kinase values. Clinical and paraclinical events. The final diagnosis was adjudicated blinded to copeptin result. RESULTS: During 12 months, 102 patients were analysed. Final diagnosis was NSTEMI for 7.8% (n=8), unstable angina for 3.9% (n=4), cardiac but non-coronary artery disease for 8.8% (n=9), non-cardiac chest pain for 52% (n=53) and unknown for 27.5% (n=28). There was no statistical difference for copeptin values between patients with NSTEMI and others (respectively 5.5 pmol/L IQR (3.1-7.9) and 6.5 pmol/L IQR (3.9-12.1), p=0.49). Only one patient with NSTEMI had a copeptin value above the cut-off of 95th centile at admission. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, copeptin does not add a diagnostic value at admission to ED for patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment elevation and with hs-cTnI below the 99th centile [corrected]. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01334645.