Lipid lowering for prevention of venous thromboembolism: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies have suggested that statins may be associated with reduced risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The aim of the current study was to assess the evidence regarding the comparative effect of all lipid-lowering therapies (LLT) in primary VTE prevention. METHODS: After a systematic search of PubMed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science up until 2 November 2022, randomized controlled trials (RCT) of statins (high- or low-/moderate-intensity), ezetimibe, or proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) were selected. An additive component network meta-analysis to compare VTE risk during long-term follow-up across different combinations of LLT was performed. RESULTS: Forty-five RCTs (n = 254 933 patients) were identified, reporting a total of 2084 VTE events. Compared with placebo, the combination of PCSK9i with high-intensity statin was associated with the largest reduction in VTE risk (risk ratio [RR] 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43-0.80), while there was a trend towards reduction for high-intensity (0.84; 0.70-1.02) and low-/moderate-intensity (0.89; 0.79-1.00) statin monotherapy. Ezetimibe monotherapy did not affect the VTE risk (1.04; 0.83-1.30). There was a gradual increase in the summary effect of VTE reduction with increasing intensity of the LLT. When compared with low-/moderate-intensity statin monotherapy, the combination of PCSK9i and high-intensity statin was significantly more likely to reduce VTE risk (0.66; 0.49-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis of RCTs suggests that LLT may have a potential for VTE prevention, particularly in high-intensity dosing and in combination therapy.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Reperfusion Strategies in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism Hospitalizations.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the contemporary use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in conjunction with reperfusion strategies in high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE). DESIGN: Observational epidemiological analysis. SETTING: The U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) (years 2016-2020). PATIENTS: High-risk PE hospitalizations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Use of ECMO in conjunction with thrombolysis-based reperfusion (systemic thrombolysis or catheter-directed thrombolysis) or mechanical reperfusion (surgical embolectomy or catheter-based thrombectomy) with regards to in-hospital mortality and major bleeding. We identified high-risk PE hospitalizations in the NIS (years 2016-2020) and investigated the use of ECMO in conjunction with thrombolysis-based (systemic thrombolysis or catheter-directed thrombolysis) and mechanical (surgical embolectomy or catheter-based thrombectomy) reperfusion strategies with regards to in-hospital mortality and major bleeding. Among 122,735 hospitalizations for high-risk PE, ECMO was used in 2,805 (2.3%); stand-alone in 1.4%, thrombolysis-based reperfusion in 0.4%, and mechanical reperfusion in 0.5%. Compared with neither reperfusion nor ECMO, ECMO plus thrombolysis-based reperfusion was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38-0.98), whereas no difference was found with ECMO plus mechanical reperfusion (aOR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.67-1.60), and ECMO stand-alone was associated with increased in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.60; 95% CI, 1.22-2.10). In the cardiac arrest subgroup, ECMO was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (aOR 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.93). Among all patients on ECMO, thrombolysis-based reperfusion was significantly associated (aOR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33-0.91), and mechanical reperfusion showed a trend (aOR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.47-1.19) toward reduced in-hospital mortality compared with no reperfusion, without increases in major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-risk PE and refractory hemodynamic instability, ECMO may be a valuable supportive treatment in conjunction with reperfusion treatment but not as a stand-alone treatment especially for patients suffering from cardiac arrest.

The Current Evidence of Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams and Their Role in Future.

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a critical medical condition requiring prompt and accurate management. The introduction and growing significance of pulmonary embolism response teams (PERT), also termed EXPERT-PE teams, signify a paradigm shift toward a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach in managing this complex entity. As the understanding of acute PE continues to evolve, PERTs stand as a linkage of optimized care, offering personalized and evidence-based management strategies for patients afflicted by this life-threatening condition. The evolving role of PERTs globally is evident in their increasing integration into the standard care pathways for acute PE. These teams have demonstrated benefits such as reducing time to diagnosis and treatment initiation, optimizing resource utilization, and improving patient outcomes.

Drivers and recent trends of hospitalisation costs related to acute pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The socio-economic burden imposed by acute pulmonary embolism (PE) on European healthcare systems is largely unknown. We sought to determine temporal trends and identify cost drivers of hospitalisation for PE in Germany. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the totality of reimbursed hospitalisation costs in Germany (G-DRG system) in the years 2016-2020. Overall, 484 884 PE hospitalisations were coded in this period. Direct hospital costs amounted to a median of 3572 (IQR, 2804 to 5869) euros, resulting in average total reimbursements of 710 million euros annually. Age, PE severity, comorbidities and in-hospital (particularly bleeding) complications were identified by multivariable logistic regression as significant cost drivers. Use of catheter-directed therapy (CDT) constantly increased (annual change in the absolute proportion of hospitalisations with CDT + 0.40% [95% CI + 0.32% to + 0.47%]; P < 0.001), and it more than doubled in the group of patients with severe PE (28% of the entire population) over time. Although CDT use was overall associated with increased hospitalisation costs, this association was no longer present (adjusted OR 1.02 [0.80-1.31]) in patients with severe PE and shock; this was related, at least in part, to a reduction in the median length of hospital stay (for 14.0 to 8.0 days). CONCLUSIONS: We identified current and emerging cost drivers of hospitalisation for PE, focusing on severe disease and intermediate/high risk of an adverse early outcome. The present study may inform reimbursement decisions by policymakers and help to guide future health economic analysis of advanced treatment options for patients with PE.

Diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension after acute pulmonary embolism: data from a practice-based longitudinal cohort.

BACKGROUND: A large prospective multicenter cohort study with systematic follow-up recently reported a 2.3% 2-year cumulative incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) after acute pulmonary embolism (PE). OBJECTIVES: The present investigation aimed to determine the reported prevalence and incidence of CTEPH diagnosis after acute PE in real-world practice over a 12-year period. METHODS: This study was based on nationwide ambulatory billing claims and drug prescription data of all residents with public health insurance in Germany from 2010 to 2021. RESULTS: A total of 573 972 patients with acute PE (median age, 71 years; 57.4% women) were identified between 2010 and 2021. Prevalence of CTEPH among patients with history of PE increased during the period from 0.4% in 2010 to 0.9% in 2021. CTEPH was diagnosed in 2556 patients after acute PE, with most (17.6%) diagnoses reported within the first 3 months after the index PE event. The cumulative incidence rate after 3 months (first quarter) was calculated at 0.08% and after the first 2 years (eighth quarter) at 0.36%; it was 0.75% over the entire (90-month) follow-up period. Patients with CTEPH diagnosis during follow-up more often had right ventricular dysfunction at the index acute PE (14.9% vs 8.3%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: The low CTEPH incidence rate after acute PE in the present analysis suggests low awareness of CTEPH. It further suggests a lack of systematic follow-up protocols for acute PE survivors in the real world. Improved implementation of existing recommendations on follow-up strategies after PE is warranted.

Healthcare resource utilisation and associated costs after low-risk pulmonary embolism: pre-specified analysis of the Home Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism (HoT-PE) study.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) and its sequelae impact healthcare systems globally. Low-risk PE patients can be managed with early discharge strategies leading to cost savings, but post-discharge costs are undetermined. PURPOSE: To define healthcare resource utilisation and overall costs during follow-up of low-risk PE. METHODS: We used an incidence-based, bottom-up approach and calculated direct and indirect costs over 3-month follow-up after low-risk PE, with data from the Home Treatment of Patients with Low-Risk Pulmonary Embolism (HoT-PE) cohort study. RESULTS: Average 3-month costs per patient having suffered low-risk PE were 7029.62 €; of this amount, 4872.93 € were associated with PE, accounting to 69.3% of total costs. Specifically, direct costs totalled 3019.33 €, and of those, 862.64 € (28.6%) were associated with PE. Anticoagulation (279.00 €), rehospitalisations (296.83 €), and ambulatory visits (194.95 €) comprised the majority of the 3-month direct costs. The remaining costs amounting to 4010.29 € were indirect costs due to loss of productivity. CONCLUSION: In a patient cohort with acute low-risk PE followed over 3 months, the majority of costs were indirect costs related to productivity loss, whereas direct, PE-specific post-discharge costs were low. Effective interventions are needed to reduce the burden of PE and associated costs, especially those related to productivity loss.

Contribution of pressure and flow changes to resistance reduction after pulmonary arterial hypertension treatment: a meta-analysis of 3898 patients.

Background: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH)-targeted therapies exert significant haemodynamic changes; however, systematic synthesis is currently lacking. Methods: We searched PubMed, CENTRAL and Web of Science for studies evaluating mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), cardiac index/cardiac output (CI/CO) and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) of PAH-targeted therapies either in monotherapy or combinations as assessed by right heart catheterisation in treatment-naïve PAH patients. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis with meta-regression. Results: We included 68 studies (90 treatment groups) with 3898 patients (age 47.4±13.2 years, 74% women). In studies with small PVR reduction (<4 WU), CI/CO increase (R2=62%) and not mPAP reduction (R2=24%) was decisive for the PVR reduction (p<0.001 and p=0.36, respectively, in the multivariable meta-regression model); however, in studies with large PVR reduction (>4 WU), both CI/CO increase (R2=72%) and mPAP reduction (R2=35%) contributed significantly to the PVR reduction (p<0.001 and p=0.01, respectively). PVR reduction as a percentage of the pre-treatment value was more pronounced in the oral+prostanoid intravenous/subcutaneous combination therapy (mean difference -50.0%, 95% CI -60.8- -39.2%), compared to oral combination therapy (-41.7%, -47.6- -35.8%), prostanoid i.v./s.c. monotherapy (-31.8%, -37.6- -25.9%) and oral monotherapy (-21.6%, -25.4- -17.8%). Changes in haemodynamic parameters were significantly associated with changes in functional capacity of patients with PAH as expressed by the 6-min walking distance. Conclusion: Combination therapies, especially with the inclusion of parenteral prostanoids, lead to remarkable haemodynamic improvement in treatment-naïve PAH patients and may unmask the contribution of mPAP reduction to the overall PVR reduction in addition to the increase in CO.

Incidence and impact of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis (AP) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) remain common and potentially lethal disease entities. AP might be an important trigger of systemic inflammtion and may activate the coagulation system with increased VTE risk. METHODS: The German nationwide inpatient sample was screened for patients admitted due to AP (ICD-code K85) 2005-2019. AP hospitalizations were stratified for VTE as well as risk-factors and the impact of VTE on in-hospital case-fatality rate were investigated. RESULTS: Overall, 797,364 hospitalizations of patients due to AP (aged in median 56.0 [IQR 44.0-71.0] years), 39.2 % females) were detected in Germany 2005-2019. Incidence of VTE in hospitalized AP patients was 1764.8 per 100,000 hospitalizations (1.8 %) with highest VTE rate between 5th and 6th decade. Cancer (OR 1.656 [95 %CI 1.513-1.812], P < 0.001), any surgery (OR 4.063 [95 %CI 3.854-4.284], P < 0.001), and heart failure (OR 1.723 [95 %CI 1.619-1.833], P < 0.001) were independently associated with VTE occurrence. Case-fatality (8.8 % vs. 2.7 %, P < 0.001) was more than 3-fold higher in AP patients with than without VTE. VTE was associated with increased case-fatality in AP patients (OR 3.925 [95 %CI 3.684-4.181], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: VTE is a life-threatening event in hospitalized AP patients associated with an almost 4-fold increased case-fatality rate. Cancer, any surgery, thrombophilia and heart failure were important risk factors for occurrence of VTE in AP.

A multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team (PERT): first experience from a single center in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Over the last few years, the concept of multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) has emerged to encounter the increasing variety and complexity in managing acute pulmonary embolism (PE). PURPOSE: To investigate PERT's composition and added clinical value in a university center in Germany. METHODS: Over 4 years (01/2019-11/2022), patients with confirmed PE were enrolled in a prospective single-center cohort study (PERT Mainz). We investigated the composition of PERT and compared, after propensity score matching, patients with acute PE before and after the initiation of PERT at our Medical University Centre. The primary outcome was in-hospital PE-related mortality. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2022, 88 patients with acute PE with a PERT decision were registered. Of those, 13 (14.8%) patients died during the in-hospital stay. Patients evaluated by a PERT had a median age of 68; 48.9% were females, and 21.7% suffered from malignancy. Right ventricular dysfunction was present in 76.1% of all patients. In total, 42.0% were classified as intermediate-high-risk PE and 11.4% as high-risk PE. First PERT contact mainly originated from emergency departments (33.3%) and intensive care units (30.0%), followed by chest pain units (21.3%) and regular wards (12.0%). The participation rate of medical specialties demonstrated that cardiologists (100%) or cardiac/vascular surgeons (98.6%) were included in almost all PERT consultations, followed by radiologists (95.9%) and anesthesiologists (87.8%). Compared to the PERT era, more patients in the pre-PERT era were classified as simplified pulmonary embolism severity index (sPESI) ≥ 1 (78.4% vs 71.6%) and as high-risk PE according to ESC 2019 guidelines (18.2% vs. 11.4%). In the pre-PERT era, low- and intermediate-low patients with PE received more frequently advanced reperfusion therapies such as systemic thrombolysis or surgical embolectomy compared to the PERT era (10.7% vs. 2.5%). Patients in the pre-PERT were found to have a considerably higher all-cause mortality and PE-related mortality rate (31.8% vs. 14.8%) compared to patients in the PERT era (22.7% vs. 13.6%). After propensity matching (1:1) by including parameters as age, sex, sPESI, and ESC risk classes, univariate regression analyses demonstrated that the PE management based on a PERT decision was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (OR, 0.37 [95%CI 0.18-0.77]; p = 0.009). For PE-related mortality, a tendency for reduction was observed (OR, 0.54 [95%CI 0.24-1.18]; p = 0.121). CONCLUSION: PERT implementation was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality rate in patients with acute PE. Large prospective studies are needed further to explore the impact of PERTs on clinical outcomes.

Rhythm vs Rate Control Strategy for Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Rhythm control, either with antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation, and rate control strategies are the cornerstones of atrial fibrillation (AF) management. Despite the increasing role of rhythm control over the past few years, it remains inconclusive which strategy is superior in improving clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study summarizes the total and time-varying evidence regarding the efficacy of rhythm- vs rate-control strategies in the management of AF. METHODS: We systematically perused the MEDLINE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials from inception to November 2023. We included studies that compared the efficacy of rhythm control (ie, antiarrhythmic drugs classes Ia, Ic, or III, AF catheter ablation, and electrical cardioversion) and rate control (ie, beta-blocker, digitalis, or calcium antagonist) strategies among patients with nonvalvular AF. The primary outcome was cardiovascular (CV) death, whereas secondary outcomes included all-cause death, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure (HF), sinus rhythm at the end of the follow-up, and rhythm control-related adverse events. A cumulative meta-analysis to assess temporal trends and a meta-regression analysis using the percentage of ablation use was performed. RESULTS: We identified 18 studies with a total of 17,536 patients (mean age: 68.6 ± 9.7 years, 37.9% females) and a mean follow-up of 28.5 months. Of those, 31.9% had paroxysmal AF. A rhythm control strategy reduced CV death (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.62-0.96), stroke (HR: 0.801; 95% CI: 0.643-0.998), and hospitalization for HF (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.69-0.94) but not all-cause death (HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.73-1.02) compared with a rate control strategy. This benefit was driven by contemporary studies, whereas more ablation use within the rhythm control arm was associated with improved outcomes, except stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF, a contemporary rhythm control strategy leads to reduced CV mortality, HF events, and stroke compared with a rate control strategy.

Estimated Annual Healthcare Costs After Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Results From a Prospective Multicentre Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Patients surviving acute pulmonary embolism (PE) necessitate long-term treatment and follow-up. However, the chronic economic impact of PE on European healthcare systems remains to be determined. METHODS AND RESULTS: We calculated the direct cost of illness during the first year after discharge for the index PE, analyzing data from a multicentre prospective cohort study in Germany. Main and accompanying readmission diagnoses were used to calculate DRG-based hospital reimbursements; anticoagulation costs were estimated from the exact treatment duration and each drug's unique national identifier; and outpatient post-PE care costs from guidelines-recommended algorithms and national reimbursement catalogues. Of 1017 patients enrolled at 17 centres, 958 (94%) completed ≥ 3-month follow-up; of those, 24% were rehospitalized (0.34 [95% CI 0.30-0.39] readmissions per PE survivor). Age, coronary artery, pulmonary and kidney disease, diabetes, and (in the sensitivity analysis of 837 patients with complete 12-month follow-up) cancer, but not recurrent PE, were independent cost predictors by hurdle gamma regression accounting for zero readmissions. Estimated rehospitalization cost was €1138 (95% CI 896-1420) per patient. Anticoagulation duration was 329 (IQR 142-365) days, with estimated average per-patient costs of €1050 (median 972; IQR 458-1197); costs of scheduled ambulatory follow-up visits amounted to €181. Total estimated direct per-patient costs during the first year after PE ranged from €2369 (primary analysis) to €2542 (sensitivity analysis). CONCLUSIONS: By estimating per-patient costs and identifying cost drivers of post-PE care, our study may inform decisions concerning implementation and reimbursement of follow-up programmes aiming at improved cardiovascular prevention. (Trial registration number: DRKS00005939).

Modelling costs of interventional pulmonary embolism treatment: implications of US trends for a European healthcare system.

AIMS: Catheter-directed treatment (CDT) of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is entering a growth phase in Europe following a steady increase in the USA in the past decade, but the potential economic impact on European healthcare systems remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We built two statistical models for the monthly trend of proportion of CDT among patients with severe (intermediate- or high-risk) PE in the USA. The conservative model was based on admission data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2016-20 and the model reflecting increasing access to advanced treatment from the PERT™ national quality assurance database registry 2018-21. By applying these models to the forecast of annual PE-related hospitalizations in Germany, we calculated the annual number of severe PE cases and the expected increase in CDT use for the period 2025-30. The NIS-based model yielded a slow increase, reaching 3.1% (95% confidence interval 3.0-3.2%) among all hospitalizations with PE in 2030; in the PERT-based model, increase would be steeper, reaching 8.7% (8.3-9.2%). Based on current reimbursement rates, we estimated an increase of annual costs for PE-related hospitalizations in Germany ranging from 15.3 to 49.8 million euros by 2030. This calculation does not account for potential cost savings, including those from reduced length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Our approach and results, which may be adapted to other European healthcare systems, provide a benchmark for healthcare costs expected to result from CDT. Data from ongoing trials on clinical benefits and cost savings are needed to determine cost-effectiveness and inform reimbursement decisions.