Explore the vast range of titles available.

Critically ill patients with COVID-19 are at increased risk for thrombotic complications which has led to an intense debate surrounding their anticoagulation management. In the absence of data from randomized controlled clinical trials, a number of consensus guidelines and recommendations have been published to facilitate clinical decision-making on this issue. However, substantive differences exist between these guidelines which can be difficult for clinicians. This review briefly summarizes the major societal guidelines and compares their similarities and differences. A common theme in all of the recommendations is to take an individualized approach to patient management and a call for prospective randomized clinical trials to address important anticoagulation issues in this population.

COVID‐19 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS‐CoV‐2]) is associated with coagulopathy through numerous mechanisms. The reported incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 has varied widely, and several meta‐analyses have been performed to assess the overall prevalence of VTE. The novelty of this coronavirus strain along with its unique mechanisms for microvascular and macrovascular thrombosis has led to uncertainty as to how to diagnose, prevent, and treat thrombosis in patients affected by this virus. This review discusses the epidemiology and pathophysiology of thrombosis in the setting of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection along with an updated review on the preventative and treatment strategies for VTE associated with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection.

Pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) are being increasingly used for the management of patients admitted with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and are endorsed by societal guidelines. Whether PERT improves outcomes remains unknown. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the outcomes of patients with acute PE treated by a PERT versus no PERT. A systematic review and study level meta-analysis was conducted by searching PubMed and EMBASE databases from inception until November 10, 2024 and included studies evaluating efficacy of PERT vs no PERT in patients admitted for acute PE. Outcomes included all-cause mortality (in-hospital and 30-day mortality), major and clinically relevant bleeding, advanced therapies utilization, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day readmission. Twenty-four retrospective observational studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 15,809 patients (mean age 61.6 years with 49% male) with acute PE of which 6228 were treated with a PERT and 9,581 without a PERT. Lower all-cause mortality (in-hospital or 30-day mortality) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.93; 24 studies), major or clinically relevant bleeding (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.86; 15 studies), higher utilization of advanced therapies (OR = 3.16; 95% CI: 1.81 to 5.49; 19 studies), and lower hospital LOS (MD = −1.49; 95% CI: −2.59 to −0.39; 14 studies) were seen in the patients treated by a PERT compared to those not treated by a PERT. In this large meta-analysis of observational studies comparing outcomes in patients treated by PERT versus not treated by PERT, there were significantly lower short-term mortality, lower major or clinically relevant bleeding, higher utilization of advanced therapies and lower hospital length of stay with the existence of PERT. PERT should be the standard of care for the management of patients with acute PE.

•STORM-PE is an RCT evaluating CAVT in PE.•STORM-PE includes intermediate high-risk acute PE patients.•The primary endpoint is a change in RV/LV ratio at 48 hours.•Other endpoints are 7-day MAEs, 90-day mortality, and symptomatic PE recurrence.•STORM-PE will also assess patient-centered 90-day functional and QoL outcomes. Therapeutic anticoagulation (AC) is standard care for pulmonary embolism (PE). Endovascular therapy with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is commonly performed for PE and well-studied in single-arm trials. The efficacy benefit of MT over AC alone in a randomized fashion remains unstudied. STORM-PE (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05684796) is a post-market, international, open-label trial conducted in partnership with The Pulmonary Embolism Response Team Consortium. Up to 100 patients with confirmed acute intermediate-high-risk PE demonstrated by right ventricular (RV) dysfunction with a right-to-left ventricular (RV/LV) ratio ≥1.0 and elevated cardiac biomarkers will be randomized 1:1 to receive AC alone or AC plus computer assisted vacuum thrombectomy (CAVT) with the Indigo Aspiration System (Penumbra Inc.). The primary outcome is a mean change in RV/LV ratio at 48 hours, assessed by computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) and adjudicated by a blinded, independent imaging Core Lab. Additional endpoints are composite major adverse events, functional outcomes (6-minute walk test, New York Heart Association classification, post-venous thromboembolism functional status scale, modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale, Borg Scale), quality of life (Pulmonary Embolism Quality of Life Questionnaire and EQ-5D-5L), mortality, and symptomatic PE recurrence through 90 days. A Clinical Events Committee will adjudicate adverse events for causality and attribution and an independent Data Safety Monitoring Board will oversee the study. STORM-PE is funded by Penumbra Inc. The STORM-PE trial will help inform future guidelines and standards of care related to frontline treatment using mechanical thrombectomy with CAVT for patients with acute intermediate-high-risk PE. STORM-PE, NCT05684796, is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05684796.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the leading cause of preventable death in hospitalized patients. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) can support guidelines recommending an individualized approach to risk assessment and prophylaxis. We conducted electronic surveys asking clinician and healthcare informaticians about their perspectives on AI/ML for VTE prevention and management. Of 101 respondents to the informatician survey, most were 40 years or older, male, clinicians and data scientists, and had performed research on AI/ML. Of the 607 US-based respondents to the clinician survey, most were 40 years or younger, female, physicians, and had never used AI to inform clinical practice. Most informaticians agreed that AI/ML can be used to manage VTE (56.0%). Over one-third were concerned that clinicians would not use the technology (38.9%), but the majority of clinicians believed that AI/ML probably or definitely can help with VTE prevention (70.1%). The most common concern in both groups was a perceived lack of transparency (informaticians 54.4%; clinicians 25.4%). These two surveys revealed that key stakeholders are interested in AI/ML for VTE prevention and management, and identified potential barriers to address prior to implementation.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Although new therapeutic tools and strategies have recently been developed for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with PE, the outcomes for patients who present with massive or high‐risk PE remain dismal. To address this crisis, pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) are being created around the world in an effort to immediately and simultaneously engage multiple specialists to determine the best course of action and coordinate the clinical care for patients with acute PE. The scope of this review is to describe the PERT model and purpose, present the structure and organization, examine the available evidence for efficacy and usefulness, and propose future directions for research that is needed to demonstrate the value of PERT and determine if this multidisciplinary approach represents a new standard of care.

Cardiovascular events and hematologic progression to myelofibrosis or leukemia are leading causes of morbidity and mortality among patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN). Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is also associated with MPN and cardiovascular disease (CVD), though its prognostic significance in MPN is not well characterized. Our primary objective was to investigate the effect of PH, defined as right-ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) ≥ 50 mmHg on echocardiogram or mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥ 20 on right heart catheterization, on cardiovascular and all-cause mortality and hematologic progression in patients with MPN and CVD (atrial fibrillation, heart failure hospitalization, and myocardial infarction after MPN diagnosis). Of the 197 patients included (86 ET, 80 PV, 31 PMF), 92 (47%) had PH and 98 (50%) were male. All-cause mortality (58 vs 37%, p  = 0.004), cardiovascular death (35 vs 9%, p  < 0.0001), and hematologic progression (23 vs 11%, p  = 0.037) occurred more frequently in patients with PH. Multivariable competing-risk and proportional hazards regression showed that PH was associated with increased risk of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.80, 95% CI 1.10–2.93), CV death (adjusted subdistribution HR 3.71, 95% CI 1.58–8.73), and hematologic progression (adjusted subdistribution HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.21–3.27).

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Compared with the general population, cancer patients with VTE have higher rates of both VTE recurrence and bleeding. While low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has been the mainstay of treatment for cancer-associated VTE for over a decade, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have recently emerged as a new therapeutic option due to their ease of administration and because they do not require laboratory monitoring. Several large randomized clinical trials have been performed or are ongoing at the time of writing, comparing DOACs with LMWH in this population. Three of these trials have thus far been published and suggest that DOACs are a reasonable alternative to LMWH for management of cancer-associated VTE. Despite the advantages offered by DOACs, these agents may not be appropriate for certain patient groups owing to increased risk of bleeding, organ compromise, extremes of weight, and other issues. Finally, data are emerging suggesting that DOACs may be useful for primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients in conjunction with validated risk assessment scores. In this evidence-based review, data for the use of DOACs to treat cancer-associated VTE will be examined, focusing on efficacy, safety, and timing of treatment. Guidance on choosing the optimal anticoagulant for a given patient is also offered.

The effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) compared with warfarin remains uncertain in obese patients. We assessed the comparative effectiveness and safety of DOACs with warfarin for the treatment of VTE among obese patients. This multi-center retrospective cohort study included adults with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 or weight ≥ 120 kg prescribed either DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban) or warfarin for a VTE diagnosis. The primary outcome was the 12-month rate of recurrent VTE. The secondary outcome was the 12-month rate of major bleeding. Among 5626 patients, 67% were prescribed warfarin and 33% were prescribed a DOAC. The 12-month VTE recurrence rate was 3.6% (67/1823) for patients treated with DOAC compared with 3.8% (143/3664) for patients treated with warfarin [odds ratio for recurrent VTE on warfarin versus DOAC (OR) (95% CI).07 (0.80, 1.45)]. The 12-month major bleeding rate was 0.5% (10/1868) for patients on DOAC versus 2.4% (89/3758) on warfarin [OR 4.25 (2.19, 8.22)]. Similar proportions of recurrent VTE occurred across BMI thresholds on DOAC and warfarin: for BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 (N = 5412), 3.6% versus 3.8%, respectively [OR 1.08 (0.80, 1.46)]; for BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 (N = 2321), 4.4% versus 3.5%, respectively [OR 0.80 (0.51, 1.26)]; and for BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2 (N = 560), 3.1% versus 3.7%, respectively [OR 1.18 (0.39, 3.56)]. Similar proportions of recurrent VTE occurred in patients with obesity treated for VTE with DOACs and warfarin. DOACs were associated with lower major bleeding compared to warfarin in patients with obesity and VTE.

A 59-year-old woman with type 1 diabetes and a 2-year history of cognitive decline presented with obtundation. There was diffuse, symmetric hypointensity in the brain on T2-weighted images and abnormal susceptibility signal throughout the basal ganglia, thalami, dentate nuclei, and cortical surfaces of the cerebral hemispheres on susceptibility-weighted images. A diagnostic test was performed.