Targeted prophylactic anticoagulation based on the TRiP(cast) score in patients with lower limb immobilisation: a multicentre, stepped wedge, randomised implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic anticoagulation in emergency department patients with lower limb trauma requiring immobilisation is controversial. The Thrombosis Risk Prediction for Patients with Cast Immobilisation-TRiP(cast)-score could identify a large subgroup of patients at low risk of venous thromboembolism for whom prophylactic anticoagulation can be safely withheld. We aimed to prospectively assess the safety of withholding anticoagulation for patients with lower limb trauma at low risk of venous thromboembolism, defined by a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7. METHODS: CASTING was a stepped-wedge, multicentre, cluster-randomised trial with blinded outcome assessment. 15 emergency departments in France and Belgium were selected and randomly assigned staggered start dates for switching from the control phase (ie, anticoagulation prescription according to the physician's usual practice) to the intervention phase (ie, targeted anticoagulation according to TRiP(cast) score: no prescription if score <7 and anticoagulation if score was ≥7). Patients were included if they presented to a participating emergency department with lower limb trauma requiring immobilisation for at least 7 days and were aged 18 years or older. The primary outcome was the 3-month cumulative rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism during the intervention phase in patients with a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7. The targeted strategy was considered safe if this rate was less than 1% with an upper 95% CI of less than 2%. The primary analysis was performed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04064489). FINDINGS: Between June 16, 2020, and Sept 15, 2021, 15 clusters and 2120 patients were included. Of the 1505 patients analysed in the intervention phase, 1159 (77·0%) had a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7 and did not receive anticoagulant treatment. The symptomatic venous thromboembolism rate was 0·7% (95% CI 0·3-1·4, n=8/1159). There was no difference between the control and the intervention phases in the cumulative rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism or in bleeding rates. INTERPRETATION: Patients with a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7 who are not receiving anticoagulation have a very low risk of venous thromboembolism. A large proportion of patients with lower limb trauma and immobilisation could safely avoid thromboprophylaxis. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health.

Safety of treating acute pulmonary embolism at home: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Home treatment is considered safe in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) patients selected by a validated triage tool (e.g. simplified PE severity index score or Hestia rule), but there is uncertainty regarding the applicability in underrepresented subgroups. The aim was to evaluate the safety of home treatment by performing an individual patient-level data meta-analysis. METHODS: Ten prospective cohort studies or randomized controlled trials were identified in a systematic search, totalling 2694 PE patients treated at home (discharged within 24 h) and identified by a predefined triage tool. The 14- and 30-day incidences of all-cause mortality and adverse events (combined endpoint of recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and/or all-cause mortality) were evaluated. The relative risk (RR) for 14- and 30-day mortalities and adverse events is calculated in subgroups using a random effects model. RESULTS: The 14- and 30-day mortalities were 0.11% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0-0.24, I2 = 0) and 0.30% (95% CI 0.09-0.51, I2 = 0). The 14- and 30-day incidences of adverse events were 0.56% (95% CI 0.28-0.84, I2 = 0) and 1.2% (95% CI 0.79-1.6, I2 = 0). Cancer was associated with increased 30-day mortality [RR 4.9; 95% prediction interval (PI) 2.7-9.1; I2 = 0]. Pre-existing cardiopulmonary disease, abnormal troponin, and abnormal (N-terminal pro-)B-type natriuretic peptide [(NT-pro)BNP] at presentation were associated with an increased incidence of 14-day adverse events [RR 3.5 (95% PI 1.5-7.9, I2 = 0), 2.5 (95% PI 1.3-4.9, I2 = 0), and 3.9 (95% PI 1.6-9.8, I2 = 0), respectively], but not mortality. At 30 days, cancer, abnormal troponin, and abnormal (NT-pro)BNP were associated with an increased incidence of adverse events [RR 2.7 (95% PI 1.4-5.2, I2 = 0), 2.9 (95% PI 1.5-5.7, I2 = 0), and 3.3 (95% PI 1.6-7.1, I2 = 0), respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of adverse events in home-treated PE patients, selected by a validated triage tool, was very low. Patients with cancer had a three- to five-fold higher incidence of adverse events and death. Patients with increased troponin or (NT-pro)BNP had a three-fold higher risk of adverse events, driven by recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding.

Simple Aspiration versus Drainage for Complete Pneumothorax: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

Rationale: Management of first episodes of primary spontaneous pneumothorax remains the subject of debate. Objectives: To determine whether first-line simple aspiration is noninferior to first-line chest tube drainage for lung expansion in patients with complete primary spontaneous pneumothorax. Methods: We conducted a prospective, open-label, randomized noninferiority trial. Adults aged 18-50 years with complete primary spontaneous pneumothorax (total separation of the lung from the chest wall), recruited at 31 French hospitals from 2009 to 2015, received simple aspiration (n = 200) or chest tube drainage (n = 202) as first-line treatment. The primary outcome was pulmonary expansion 24 hours after the procedure. Secondary outcomes were tolerance of treatment, occurrence of adverse events, and recurrence of pneumothorax within 1 year. Substantial discordance in the numerical inputs used for trial planning and the actual trial rates of the primary outcome resulted in a reevaluation of the trial analysis plan. Measurement and Main Results: Treatment failure occurred in 29% in the aspiration group and 18% in the chest tube drainage group (difference in failure rate, 0.113; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.026-0.200). The aspiration group experienced less pain overall (mean difference, -1.4; 95% CI, -1.89, -0.91), less pain limiting breathing (frequency difference, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.27, -0.09), and less kinking of the device (frequency difference, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.09, -0.01). Recurrence of pneumothorax was 20% in this group versus 27% in the drainage group (frequency difference, -0.07; 95% CI, -0.16, +0.02). Conclusions: First-line management of complete primary spontaneous pneumothorax with simple aspiration had a higher failure rate than chest tube drainage but was better tolerated with fewer adverse events. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01008228).

Diagnostic management of acute pulmonary embolism: a prediction model based on a patient data meta-analysis.

AIMS: Risk stratification is used for decisions regarding need for imaging in patients with clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim was to develop a clinical prediction model that provides an individualized, accurate probability estimate for the presence of acute PE in patients with suspected disease based on readily available clinical items and D-dimer concentrations. METHODS AND RESULTS: An individual patient data meta-analysis was performed based on sixteen cross-sectional or prospective studies with data from 28 305 adult patients with clinically suspected PE from various clinical settings, including primary care, emergency care, hospitalized and nursing home patients. A multilevel logistic regression model was built and validated including ten a priori defined objective candidate predictors to predict objectively confirmed PE at baseline or venous thromboembolism (VTE) during follow-up of 30 to 90 days. Multiple imputation was used for missing data. Backward elimination was performed with a P-value <0.10. Discrimination (c-statistic with 95% confidence intervals [CI] and prediction intervals [PI]) and calibration (outcome:expected [O:E] ratio and calibration plot) were evaluated based on internal-external cross-validation. The accuracy of the model was subsequently compared with algorithms based on the Wells score and D-dimer testing. The final model included age (in years), sex, previous VTE, recent surgery or immobilization, haemoptysis, cancer, clinical signs of deep vein thrombosis, inpatient status, D-dimer (in µg/L), and an interaction term between age and D-dimer. The pooled c-statistic was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.89; 95% PI, 0.77-0.93) and overall calibration was very good (pooled O:E ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87-1.14; 95% PI, 0.55-1.79). The model slightly overestimated VTE probability in the lower range of estimated probabilities. Discrimination of the current model in the validation data sets was better than that of the Wells score combined with a D-dimer threshold based on age (c-statistic 0.73; 95% CI, 0.70-0.75) or structured clinical pretest probability (c-statistic 0.79; 95% CI, 0.76-0.81). CONCLUSION: The present model provides an absolute, individualized probability of PE presence in a broad population of patients with suspected PE, with very good discrimination and calibration. Its clinical utility needs to be evaluated in a prospective management or impact study. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID 89366.

Derivation and validation of a risk-stratification model for patients with probable or proven COVID-19 in EDs: the revised HOME-CoV score.

BACKGROUND: The HOME-CoV (Hospitalisation or Outpatient ManagEment of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection) score is a validated list of uniquely clinical criteria indicating which patients with probable or proven COVID-19 can be treated at home. The aim of this study was to optimise the score to improve its ability to discriminate between patients who do and do not need admission. METHODS: A revised HOME-CoV score was derived using data from a previous prospective multicentre study which evaluated the original Home-CoV score. Patients with proven or probable COVID-19 attending 34 EDs in France, Monaco and Belgium between April and May 2020 were included. The population was split into a derivation and validation sample corresponding to the observational and interventional phases of the original study. The main outcome was non-invasive or invasive ventilation or all-cause death within 7 days following inclusion. Two threshold values were defined using a sensitivity of >0.9 and a specificity of >0.9 to identify low-risk and high-risk patients, respectively. The revised HOME-CoV score was then validated by retrospectively applying it to patients in the same EDs with proven or probable COVID-19 during the interventional phase. The revised HOME-CoV score was also tested against original HOME-CoV, qCSI, qSOFA, CRB65 and SMART-COP in this validation cohort. RESULTS: There were 1696 patients in the derivation cohort, of whom 65 (3.8%) required non-invasive ventilation or mechanical ventilation or died within 7 days and 1304 patients in the validation cohort, of whom 22 (1.7%) had a progression of illness. The revised score included seven clinical criteria. The area under the curve (AUC) was 87.6 (95% CI 84.7 to 90.6). The cut-offs to define low-risk and high-risk patients were <2 and >3, respectively. In the validation cohort, the AUC was 85.8 (95% CI 80.6 to 91.0). A score of <2 qualified 73% of patients as low risk with a sensitivity of 0.77 (0.55-0.92) and a negative predictive value of 0.99 (0.99-1.00). CONCLUSION: The revised HOME-CoV score, which does not require laboratory testing, may allow accurate risk stratification and safely qualify a significant proportion of patients with probable or proven COVID-19 for home treatment.

Safety and Efficiency of Diagnostic Strategies for Ruling Out Pulmonary Embolism in Clinically Relevant Patient Subgroups : A Systematic Review and Individual-Patient Data Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: How diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) perform in relevant patient subgroups defined by sex, age, cancer, and previous venous thromboembolism (VTE) is unknown. PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficiency of the Wells and revised Geneva scores combined with fixed and adapted D-dimer thresholds, as well as the YEARS algorithm, for ruling out acute PE in these subgroups. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE from 1 January 1995 until 1 January 2021. STUDY SELECTION: 16 studies assessing at least 1 diagnostic strategy. DATA EXTRACTION: Individual-patient data from 20 553 patients. DATA SYNTHESIS: Safety was defined as the diagnostic failure rate (the predicted 3-month VTE incidence after exclusion of PE without imaging at baseline). Efficiency was defined as the proportion of individuals classified by the strategy as "PE considered excluded" without imaging tests. Across all strategies, efficiency was highest in patients younger than 40 years (47% to 68%) and lowest in patients aged 80 years or older (6.0% to 23%) or patients with cancer (9.6% to 26%). However, efficiency improved considerably in these subgroups when pretest probability-dependent D-dimer thresholds were applied. Predicted failure rates were highest for strategies with adapted D-dimer thresholds, with failure rates varying between 2% and 4% in the predefined patient subgroups. LIMITATIONS: Between-study differences in scoring predictor items and D-dimer assays, as well as the presence of differential verification bias, in particular for classifying fatal events and subsegmental PE cases, all of which may have led to an overestimation of the predicted failure rates of adapted D-dimer thresholds. CONCLUSION: Overall, all strategies showed acceptable safety, with pretest probability-dependent D-dimer thresholds having not only the highest efficiency but also the highest predicted failure rate. From an efficiency perspective, this individual-patient data meta-analysis supports application of adapted D-dimer thresholds. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Dutch Research Council. (PROSPERO: CRD42018089366).

Risk for Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism Managed Without Anticoagulation : A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of pulmonary embolism has been increasing, but its case-fatality rate is decreasing, suggesting a lesser severity of illness. The clinical importance of patients with pulmonary embolism isolated to the subsegmental vessels is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with subsegmental pulmonary embolism managed without anticoagulation. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01455818). SETTING: Eighteen sites between February 2011 and February 2021. PATIENTS: Patients with isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism. INTERVENTION: At diagnosis, patients underwent bilateral lower-extremity venous ultrasonography, which was repeated 1 week later if results were negative. Patients without deep venous thrombosis did not receive anticoagulant therapy. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was recurrent venous thromboembolism during the 90-day follow-up period. RESULTS: Recruitment was stopped prematurely because the predefined stopping rule was met after 292 of a projected 300 patients were enrolled. Of the 266 patients included in the primary analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 8 patients, for a cumulative incidence of 3.1% (95% CI, 1.6% to 6.1%) over the 90-day follow-up. The incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism was 2.1% (CI, 0.8% to 5.5%) and 5.7% (CI, 2.2% to 14.4%) over the 90-day follow-up in patients with single and multiple isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism, respectively. No patients had a fatal recurrent pulmonary embolism. LIMITATION: The study was restricted to patients with low-risk subsegmental pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: Overall, patients with subsegmental pulmonary embolism who did not have proximal deep venous thrombosis had a higher-than-expected rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and French Ministry of Health Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.

Management of epistaxis associated with oral antithrombotic drugs in emergency department and impact on prescription thereafter.

OBJECTIVES: To describe management, and to assess factors associated with antithrombotic prescription thereafter in patients who had epistaxis referred to emergency department (ED). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. From EDs, clinical, biological and hospital data were collected. The clinical database was linked to the French Health Insurance Database where we retrieved antithrombotic drug deliveries in a 3-month period before and after referral. SETTING: Multicentric population-based cohort study within five well-defined areas. PARTICIPANTS: We considered 306 patients referred for epistaxis with a stable oral antithrombotic regimen before referral. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We considered management, hospital outcome and case fatality. Antithrombotic prescription in a 3-month follow-up period was categorised into three classes: no change, class change, or discontinuation. During follow-up, hospitalisation for epistaxis or ischaemic events was searched. RESULTS: Among 306 adult individuals (mean age: 76 years), 166 took oral anticoagulant and 140 an antiplatelet drug. Blood transfusion was needed in 13.7% of patients and anterior packing alone in 61%. Half of the patients were hospitalised; 301 were discharged alive. Considering antithrombotic prescription thereafter we observed no change in 219 patients (72.8%), class changes in 47 patients (15.6%) and discontinuation in 35 patients (11.6%). We identified four independent predictors for antithrombotic prescription: hospitalisation (vs. returning home, p = .05), age (p = .03), haemoglobin level (p = .03) and oral anticoagulant (vs. antiplatelet agent, p < .001). During the 3 months following discharge, 2 thrombotic and 15 bleeding events were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Epistaxis referred to emergency department had an impact on subsequent antithrombotic prescription. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT02886533.

Ruling out pulmonary embolism across different healthcare settings: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The challenging clinical dilemma of detecting pulmonary embolism (PE) in suspected patients is encountered in a variety of healthcare settings. We hypothesized that the optimal diagnostic approach to detect these patients in terms of safety and efficiency depends on underlying PE prevalence, case mix, and physician experience, overall reflected by the type of setting where patients are initially assessed. The objective of this study was to assess the capability of ruling out PE by available diagnostic strategies across all possible settings. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a literature search (MEDLINE) followed by an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis (MA; 23 studies), including patients from self-referral emergency care (n = 12,612), primary healthcare clinics (n = 3,174), referred secondary care (n = 17,052), and hospitalized or nursing home patients (n = 2,410). Multilevel logistic regression was performed to evaluate diagnostic performance of the Wells and revised Geneva rules, both using fixed and adapted D-dimer thresholds to age or pretest probability (PTP), for the YEARS algorithm and for the Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC). All strategies were tested separately in each healthcare setting. Following studies done in this field, the primary diagnostic metrices estimated from the models were the "failure rate" of each strategy-i.e., the proportion of missed PE among patients categorized as "PE excluded" and "efficiency"-defined as the proportion of patients categorized as "PE excluded" among all patients. In self-referral emergency care, the PERC algorithm excludes PE in 21% of suspected patients at a failure rate of 1.12% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 1.70), whereas this increases to 6.01% (4.09 to 8.75) in referred patients to secondary care at an efficiency of 10%. In patients from primary healthcare and those referred to secondary care, strategies adjusting D-dimer to PTP are the most efficient (range: 43% to 62%) at a failure rate ranging between 0.25% and 3.06%, with higher failure rates observed in patients referred to secondary care. For this latter setting, strategies adjusting D-dimer to age are associated with a lower failure rate ranging between 0.65% and 0.81%, yet are also less efficient (range: 33% and 35%). For all strategies, failure rates are highest in hospitalized or nursing home patients, ranging between 1.68% and 5.13%, at an efficiency ranging between 15% and 30%. The main limitation of the primary analyses was that the diagnostic performance of each strategy was compared in different sets of studies since the availability of items used in each diagnostic strategy differed across included studies; however, sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were robust. CONCLUSIONS: The capability of safely and efficiently ruling out PE of available diagnostic strategies differs for different healthcare settings. The findings of this IPD MA help in determining the optimum diagnostic strategies for ruling out PE per healthcare setting, balancing the trade-off between failure rate and efficiency of each strategy.

Pregnancy-Adapted YEARS Algorithm for Diagnosis of Suspected Pulmonary Embolism.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism is one of the leading causes of maternal death in the Western world. Because of the low specificity and sensitivity of the d-dimer test, all pregnant women with suspected pulmonary embolism undergo computed tomographic (CT) pulmonary angiography or ventilation-perfusion scanning, both of which involve radiation exposure to the mother and fetus. Whether a pregnancy-adapted algorithm could be used to safely avoid diagnostic imaging in pregnant women with suspected pulmonary embolism is unknown. METHODS: In a prospective study involving pregnant women with suspected pulmonary embolism, we assessed three criteria from the YEARS algorithm (clinical signs of deep-vein thrombosis, hemoptysis, and pulmonary embolism as the most likely diagnosis) and measured the d-dimer level. Pulmonary embolism was ruled out if none of the three criteria were met and the d-dimer level was less than 1000 ng per milliliter or if one or more of the three criteria were met and the d-dimer level was less than 500 ng per milliliter. Adaptation of the YEARS algorithm for pregnant women involved compression ultrasonography for women with symptoms of deep-vein thrombosis; if the results were positive (i.e., a clot was present), CT pulmonary angiography was not performed. All patients in whom pulmonary embolism had not been ruled out underwent CT pulmonary angiography. The primary outcome was the incidence of venous thromboembolism at 3 months. The secondary outcome was the proportion of patients in whom CT pulmonary angiography was not indicated to safely rule out pulmonary embolism. RESULTS: A total of 510 women were screened, of whom 12 (2.4%) were excluded. Pulmonary embolism was diagnosed in 20 patients (4.0%) at baseline. During follow-up, popliteal deep-vein thrombosis was diagnosed in 1 patient (0.21%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 1.2); no patient had pulmonary embolism. CT pulmonary angiography was not indicated, and thus was avoided, in 195 patients (39%; 95% CI, 35 to 44). The efficiency of the algorithm was highest during the first trimester of pregnancy and lowest during the third trimester; CT pulmonary angiography was avoided in 65% of patients who began the study in the first trimester and in 32% who began the study in the third trimester. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary embolism was safely ruled out by the pregnancy-adapted YEARS diagnostic algorithm across all trimesters of pregnancy. CT pulmonary angiography was avoided in 32 to 65% of patients. (Funded by Leiden University Medical Center and 17 other participating hospitals; Artemis Netherlands Trial Register number, NL5726.).

Clinical use of low-dose parenteral anticoagulation, incidence of major bleeding and mortality: a multi-centre cohort study using the French national health data system.

PURPOSE: Low-dose parenteral anticoagulation has demonstrated its efficacy for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in randomized trials. However, current practice is not widely documented. In ambulatory settings, we aimed to provide an overview of the clinical use of low-dose parenteral anticoagulation in France and to assess the incidence of major bleeding and death rates. METHODS: A population-based prospective cohort study using the French national health data system (SNIIRAM) identified 142,815 adults living in five well-defined geographical areas who had a course of low-dose parenteral anticoagulants (a total of 150,389 courses) in the period 2013-2015. The main outcome measures were the types of low-dose parenteral anticoagulant, the duration and the clinical context. Adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) were derived from Poisson models. RESULTS: Enoxaparin was the most frequently prescribed anticoagulant (58.9%) followed by tinzaparin (27.3%) and fondaparinux (10.9%). Patients receiving unfractionated heparin (N = 766, 0.53%) were older, more frequently had renal disease (48.75%) and had a higher modified HAS-B(L)ED score (≥ 3 in 61.6%) than patients receiving low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Surgical thrombo-prophylaxis was the most frequent indication (47.6%), followed by medical prophylaxis (29.9%). Course durations were in line with regulatory agency specifications. Only 43 (0.028%) major bleeding events and 478 (0.32%) deaths were observed. Adjusted IRRs for major bleeding or death were not significantly different for dalteparin/nadroparin, tinzaparin or fondaparinux compared to enoxaparin. CONCLUSION: Very low incidence rates of major bleeding and all-cause mortality were observed. Our study confirms the safety of LMWHs and fondaparinux in thrombo-prophylaxis in ambulatory settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02886533.

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.

Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Gestalt, Scoring Systems, and Artificial Intelligence.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a diagnostic challenge in 2021. As the pathology is potentially fatal and signs and symptoms are nonspecific, further investigations are classically required. Based on the Bayesian approach, clinical probability became the keystone of the diagnostic strategy to rule out PE in the case of a negative testing. Several clinical probability assessment methods are validated: gestalt, the Wells score, or the revised Geneva score. While the debate persists as to the best way to assess clinical probability, its assessment allows for the good interpretation of the investigation results and therefore directs the correct diagnostic strategy. The wide availability of computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) resulted in a major increase in investigations with a moderate increase in diagnosis, without any notable improvement in patient outcomes. This leads to a new challenge for PE diagnosis which is the limitation of the number of testing for suspected PE. We review different strategies recently developed to achieve this goal. The last challenge concerns the implementation in clinical practice. Two approaches are developed: simplification of the strategies versus the use of digital support tools allowing more sophisticated strategies. Artificial intelligence with machine-learning algorithms will probably be a future tool to guide the physician in this complex approach concerning acute PE suspicion.

Adaptation of ED design layout during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to describe the organisational changes in French EDs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic with regard to architectural constraints and compare with the recommendations of the various bodies concerning the structural adjustments to be made in this context. METHODS: As part of this cross-sectional study, all heads of emergency services or their deputies were contacted to complete an electronic survey. This was a standardised online questionnaire consisting of four parts: characteristics of the responding centre, creation of the COVID-19 zone and activation of the hospital's emergency operations plan, flow and circulation of patients and, finally, staff management. Each centre was classified according to its workload related to COVID-19 and its size (university hospital centre, high-capacity hospital centre and low-capacity hospital centre). The main endpoint was the frequency of implementation of international guidelines for ED organisation. RESULTS: Between 11 May and 20 June 2020, 57 French EDs completed the online questionnaire and were included in the analysis. Twenty-eight EDs were able to separate patient flows into two zones: high and low viral density (n=28/57, 49.1%). Of the centres included, 52.6% set up a specific triage area for patients with suspected COVID-19 (n=30/57). Whereas, in 15 of the EDs (26.3%), the architecture made it impossible to increase the surface area of the ED. CONCLUSION: All EDs have adapted, but many of the changes recommended for the organisation of ED could not be implemented. ED architecture constrains adaptive capacities in the context of COVID-19.

Prevalence of Pulmonary Embolism Among Patients With COPD Hospitalized With Acutely Worsening Respiratory Symptoms.

IMPORTANCE: The prevalence of pulmonary embolism in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and acutely worsening respiratory symptoms remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of pulmonary embolism in patients with COPD admitted to the hospital for acutely worsening respiratory symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter cross-sectional study with prospective follow-up conducted in 7 French hospitals. A predefined pulmonary embolism diagnostic algorithm based on Geneva score, D-dimer levels, and spiral computed tomographic pulmonary angiography plus leg compression ultrasound was applied within 48 hours of admission; all patients had 3-month follow-up. Patients were recruited from January 2014 to May 2017 and the final date of follow-up was August 22, 2017. EXPOSURES: Acutely worsening respiratory symptoms in patients with COPD. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was pulmonary embolism diagnosed within 48 hours of admission. Key secondary outcome was pulmonary embolism during a 3-month follow-up among patients deemed not to have venous thromboembolism at admission and who did not receive anticoagulant treatment. Other outcomes were venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism and/or deep vein thrombosis) at admission and during follow-up, and 3-month mortality, whether venous thromboembolism was clinically suspected or not. RESULTS: Among 740 included patients (mean age, 68.2 years [SD, 10.9 years]; 274 women [37.0%]), pulmonary embolism was confirmed within 48 hours of admission in 44 patients (5.9%; 95% CI, 4.5%-7.9%). Among the 670 patients deemed not to have venous thromboembolism at admission and who did not receive anticoagulation, pulmonary embolism occurred in 5 patients (0.7%; 95% CI, 0.3%-1.7%) during follow-up, including 3 deaths related to pulmonary embolism. The overall 3-month mortality rate was 6.8% (50 of 740; 95% CI, 5.2%-8.8%). The proportion of patients who died during follow-up was higher among those with venous thromboembolism at admission than the proportion of those without it at admission (14 [25.9%] of 54 patients vs 36 [5.2%] of 686; risk difference, 20.7%, 95% CI, 10.7%-33.8%; P < .001). The prevalence of venous thromboembolism was 11.7% (95% CI, 8.6%-15.9%) among patients in whom pulmonary embolism was suspected (n = 299) and was 4.3% (95% CI, 2.8%-6.6%) among those in whom pulmonary embolism was not suspected (n = 441). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admitted to the hospital with an acute worsening of respiratory symptoms, pulmonary embolism was detected in 5.9% of patients using a predefined diagnostic algorithm. Further research is needed to understand the possible role of systematic screening for pulmonary embolism in this patient population.

Major bleeding risk associated with oral anticoagulant in real clinical practice. A multicentre 3-year period population-based prospective cohort study.

AIMS: The objective was to compare major bleeding risk of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; per type and dose) with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), irrespective of indication, using real-world data. METHODS: A population-based prospective cohort study, using the French national health data system (SNIIRAM), identified 47 469 adults living within 5 well-defined geographical areas, who were new users of oral anticoagulants in the period 2013-2015: 20 205 VKA users, 19 579 rivaroxaban users, 4225 dabigatran users and 3460 apixaban users. From all emergency departments within these areas, clinical data for all adults referred for bleeding was collected and medically validated. The databases were linked for common key variables. The main outcome measure was major bleeding: intracranial haemorrhage, major gastrointestinal bleeding and other major bleeding events. Hazard ratios were derived from adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. We used propensity score weighting as a sensitivity analysis, with separate analyses according to indications (atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism). RESULTS: Compared to VKAs, high and low-dose DOACs were associated with a reduced risk of intracranial haemorrhage (adjusted hazard ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.37-0.82 and 0.54, 0.26-1.12 respectively), and a reduced risk of other major bleeding events (0.41, 0.29-0.58 and 0.41, 0.22-0.79 respectively), irrespective of duration and indication. Neither DOAC dose evidenced any significant difference from VKAs in terms of risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding. CONCLUSION: There is a clear benefit of using DOACs with regard to intracranial haemorrhage. The study provides new insight into major gastrointestinal and other major bleeding events.

Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism During Pregnancy: A Multicenter Prospective Management Outcome Study.

Background: Data on the optimal diagnostic management of pregnant women with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) are limited, and guidelines provide inconsistent recommendations on use of diagnostic tests. Objective: To prospectively validate a diagnostic strategy in pregnant women with suspected PE. Design: Multicenter, multinational, prospective diagnostic management outcome study involving pretest clinical probability assessment, high-sensitivity D-dimer testing, bilateral lower limb compression ultrasonography (CUS), and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00740454). Setting: 11 centers in France and Switzerland between August 2008 and July 2016. Patients: Pregnant women with clinically suspected PE in emergency departments. Intervention: Pulmonary embolism was excluded in patients with a low or intermediate pretest clinical probability and a negative D-dimer result. All others underwent lower limb CUS and, if results were negative, CTPA. A ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scan was done if CTPA results were inconclusive. Pulmonary embolism was excluded if results of the diagnostic work-up were negative, and untreated pregnant women had clinical follow-up at 3 months. Measurements: The primary outcome was the rate of adjudicated venous thromboembolic events during the 3-month follow-up. Results: 441 women were assessed for eligibility, and 395 were included in the study. Among these, PE was diagnosed in 28 (7.1%) (proximal deep venous thrombosis found on ultrasonography [n = 7], positive CTPA result [n = 19], and high-probability V/Q scan [n = 2]) and excluded in 367 (clinical probability and negative D-dimer result [n = 46], negative CTPA result [n = 290], normal or low-probability V/Q scan [n = 17], and other reason [n = 14]). Twenty-two women received extended anticoagulation during follow-up, mainly for previous venous thromboembolic disease. The rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolic events was 0.0% (95% CI, 0.0% to 1.0%) among untreated women after exclusion of PE on the basis of negative results on the diagnostic work-up. Limitation: There were several protocol deviations, reflecting the difficulty of performing studies in pregnant women with suspected PE. Conclusion: A diagnostic strategy based on assessment of clinical probability, D-dimer measurement, CUS, and CTPA can safely rule out PE in pregnant women. Primary Funding Source: Swiss National Foundation for Scientific Research, Groupe d'Etude de la Thrombose de Bretagne Occidentale, and International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

D-dimer: Preanalytical, analytical, postanalytical variables, and clinical applications.

D-dimer is a soluble fibrin degradation product deriving from the plasmin-mediated degradation of cross-linked fibrin. D-dimer can hence be considered a biomarker of activation of coagulation and fibrinolysis, and it is routinely used for ruling out venous thromboembolism (VTE). D-dimer is increasingly used to assess the risk of VTE recurrence and to help define the optimal duration of anticoagulation treatment in patients with VTE, for diagnosing disseminated intravascular coagulation, and for screening medical patients at increased risk of VTE. This review is aimed at (1) revising the definition of D-dimer; (2) discussing preanalytical variables affecting the measurement of D-dimer; (3) reviewing and comparing assay performance and some postanalytical variables (e.g. different units and age-adjusted cutoffs); and (4) discussing the use of D-dimer measurement across different clinical settings.