Use of the National Early Warning Score for predicting deterioration of patients with acute pulmonary embolism: a post-hoc analysis of the YEARS Study.

BACKGROUND: The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) and the simplified PESI (sPESI) are validated scores for mortality prediction in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). National Early Warning Score (NEWS) is a general prognostic risk score for multiple clinical settings. We investigated whether the NEWS had a comparable performance with the PESI and sPESI, for predicting intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death in patients with acute PE. METHODS: In haemodynamically stable patients with confirmed PE from the YEARS Study (2013-2015), we evaluated the performance of the NEWS, PESI and sPESI for predicting 7-day ICU admission and 30-day mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. RESULTS: Of 352 patients, 12 (3.4%) were admitted to the ICU and 5 (1.4%) died. The AUC of the NEWS for ICU admission was 0.80 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.94) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.00) for 30-day mortality. At a threshold of 3 points, NEWS yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 92% and 53% for ICU admission and 100% and 52% for 30-day mortality. The AUC of the PESI was 0.64 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.79) for ICU admission and 0.94 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.00) for mortality. At a threshold of 66 points, PESI yielded a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 38% for ICU admission. For mortality, these were 100% and 37%, respectively. The performance of the sPESI was similar to that of PESI. CONCLUSION: In comparison with PESI and sPESI, NEWS adequately predicted 7-day ICU admission as well as 30-day mortality, supporting its potential relevance for clinical practice.

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.

Home treatment of acute pulmonary embolism: state of the art in 2018.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Historically, because of the necessity of parenteral anticoagulation, patients with acute pulmonary embolism are hospitalized until stable oral anticoagulation is achieved. Despite improvements in prognostic risk stratification and the introduction of the direct oral anticoagulants, home treatment is still not widely applied. Main advantages of home treatment involve improvement of quality of life and significant healthcare cost reduction. In this review, we summarized recent published data on home treatment of patients with acute pulmonary embolism. RECENT FINDINGS: Although a significant decrease in mean duration of hospital admission for pulmonary embolism has been demonstrated over the last decade in Europe, most pulmonary embolism patients are currently hospitalized while they might be treated in an outpatient setting. In recent years, five major studies have been performed, in which the decision to initiate home treatment was based on the Hestia criteria in most patients. Over 98% of patients treated at home had an uncomplicated course. SUMMARY: Home treatment of acute pulmonary embolism is suggested to be feasible and safe in 30-55% of all patients. Results of ongoing trials will provide more insight in the optimal strategy to select patients with pulmonary embolism who are eligible for home treatment and likely will result in more widespread application of this practice.

Home Treatment Compared to Initial Hospitalization in Normotensive Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism in the Netherlands: A Cost Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism constitutes substantial health care costs amounting to approximately 60 million euros per year in the Netherlands. Compared with initial hospitalization, home treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with a cost reduction. An accurate estimation of cost savings per patient treated at home is currently lacking. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs during the first 3 months after a PE diagnosis in patients who are treated at home versus those who are initially hospitalized. METHODS: Patient-level data of the YEARS cohort study, including 383 normotensive patients diagnosed with PE, were used to estimate the proportion of patients treated at home, mean hospitalization duration in those who were hospitalized, and rates of PE-related readmissions and complications. To correct for baseline differences within the two groups, regression analyses was performed. The primary outcome was the average total health care costs during a 3-month follow-up period for patients initially treated at home or in hospital. RESULTS: Mean hospitalization duration for the initial treatment was 0.69 days for those treated initially at home (n = 181) and 4.3 days for those initially treated in hospital (n = 202). Total average costs per hospitalized patient were €3,209 and €1,512 per patient treated at home. The adjusted mean difference was €1,483 (95% confidence interval: €1,181-1,784). CONCLUSION: Home treatment of hemodynamically stable patients with acute PE was associated with an estimated net cost reduction of €1,483 per patient. This difference underlines the advantage of triage-based home treatment of these patients.

Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban for Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism in Daily Practice.

Introduction Phase 3 trials have shown comparable efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists in patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), with less major bleeding events in patients randomized to DOAC treatment. With DOACs being increasingly used in clinical practice, evaluation of the DOACs in daily practice-based conditions is needed to confirm their safety and effectiveness. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of apixaban in VTE patients in daily practice. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive patients diagnosed with VTE in two Dutch hospitals (Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden and Haga Teaching Hospital, The Hague) were identified based on administrative codes. We assessed recurrent VTE, major bleeding and mortality during a 3-month follow-up period in those treated with apixaban. Results Of 671 consecutive VTE patients treated with apixaban, 371 presented with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and 300 patients with deep-vein thrombosis. During 3 months treatment, 2 patients had a recurrent VTE (0.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-1.1), 12 patients had major bleeding (1.8%; 95% CI: 1.0-3.2), and 11 patients died (1.6%; 95% CI: 0.9-2.9), of which one patient with recurrent PE and one because of a intracerebral bleeding. Conclusion In this daily practice-based cohort, apixaban yielded a low incidence of recurrent VTE, comparable to the phase 3 AMPLIFY study patients. The incidence of major bleeding was higher than in the AMPLIFY-study patients, reflecting the importance of daily practice evaluation and the fact that results from phase III clinical studies cannot be directly extrapolated toward daily practice.

Current practice patterns of outpatient management of acute pulmonary embolism: A post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown the safety of home treatment of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) at low risk of adverse events. Management studies focusing on home treatment have suggested that 30% to 55% of acute PE patients could be treated at home, based on the HESTIA criteria, but data from day-to-day clinical practice are largely unavailable. AIM: To determine current practice patterns of home treatment of acute PE in the Netherlands. METHOD: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients who were discharged <24 h and reasons for admission if treated in hospital. Further, we compared the 3-month incidence of PE-related unscheduled readmissions between patients treated at home and in hospital. RESULTS: Of the 404 outpatients with PE included in this post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study, 184 (46%) were treated at home. The median duration of admission of the hospitalized patients was 3.0 days. The rate of PE-related readmissions of patients treated at home was 9.7% versus 8.6% for hospitalized patients (crude hazard ratio 1.1 (95% CI 0.57-2.1)). The 3-month incidence of any adverse event was 3.8% in those treated at home (2 recurrent VTE, 3 major bleedings and two deaths) compared to 10% in the hospitalized patients (3 recurrent VTE, 6 major bleedings and fourteen deaths). CONCLUSIONS: In the YEARS study, 46% of patients with PE were treated at home with low incidence of adverse events. PE-related readmission rates were not different between patients treated at home or in hospital.

Reasons for Hospitalization of Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism Based on the Hestia Decision Rule.

BACKGROUND: The Hestia criteria can be used to select pulmonary embolism (PE) patients for outpatient treatment. The subjective Hestia criterion "medical/social reason for admission" allows the treating physician to consider any patient-specific circumstances in the final management decision. It is unknown how often and why this criterion is scored. METHODS: This is a patient-level post hoc analysis of the combined Hestia and Vesta studies. The main outcomes were the frequency of all scored Hestia items in hospitalized patients and the explicit reason for scoring the subjective criterion. Hemodynamic parameters and computed tomography-assessed right ventricular (RV)/left ventricular (LV) ratio of those only awarded with the subjective criterion were compared with patients treated at home. RESULTS: From the 1,166 patients screened, data were available for all 600 who were hospitalized. Most were hospitalized to receive oxygen therapy (45%); 227 (38%) were only awarded with the subjective criterion, of whom 51 because of "intermediate to intermediate-high risk PE." Compared with patients with intermediate risk PE (RV/LV ratio > 1.0) treated at home (179/566, 32%), hospitalized patients with only the subjective criterion had a higher mean RV/LV ratio (mean difference +0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.41) and a higher heart rate (+18/min, 95% CI 10-25). No relevant differences were observed for other hemodynamic parameters. CONCLUSION: The most frequent reason for hospital admission was oxygen therapy. In the decision to award the subjective criterion as sole argument for admission, the severity of the RV overload and resulting hemodynamic response of the patient was taken into account rather than just abnormal RV/LV ratio.

Home treatment of patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism - An evaluation of daily practice.

BACKGROUND: Home treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is challenging due to the high risk of adverse events. While home treatment is quite agreeable to cancer patients, studies evaluating the safety of VTE home treatment in this setting are largely unavailable. METHODS: This was an observational study in patients with cancer-associated VTE. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients treated at home (hospital discharge <24 h after diagnosis) and the 3-month incidence of VTE-related adverse events (major bleeding, recurrent VTE and/or suspected VTE-related mortality) in patients managed in hospital versus at home. RESULTS: A total of 183 outpatients were diagnosed with cancer-associated VTE: 69 had deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and 114 had pulmonary embolism (PE ±â€¯DVT). Of those, 120 (66%) were treated at home; this was 83% for patients with DVT and 55% for patients with PE (±DVT). The 3-month incidence of any VTE-related adverse event was 13% in those treated at home versus 19% in the hospitalized patients (HR 0.48; 95%CI 0.22-1.1), independent of initial presentation as PE or DVT. All-cause 3-month mortality occurred in 33 patients treated as inpatient (54%) compared to 29 patients treated at home (24%; crude HR 3.1 95%CI 1.9-5.0). CONCLUSIONS: Two-third of patients with cancer-associated VTE - including PE - were selected to start anticoagulant treatment at home. Cancer-associated VTE is associated with high rates of VTE-related adverse events independent of initial in hospital or home treatment. However, home treatment may be a good option for selected patients with cancer-associated DVT or PE.