Explore the vast range of titles available.

Major bleedings other than gastrointestinal (GI) and intracranial (ICH) and mortality rates associated with antiplatelet drugs in real-world clinical practice are unknown. The objective was to estimate major bleeding risk and mortality among new users of antiplatelet drugs in real-world clinical practice. A population-based prospective cohort using the French national health data system (SNIIRAM), identified 69,911 adults living within five well-defined geographical areas, who were new users of antiplatelet drugs in 2013-2015 and who had not received any antithrombotics in 2012. Among them, 63,600 started a monotherapy and 6,311 a dual regimen. Clinical data for all adults referred for bleeding was collected from all emergency departments within these areas, and medically validated. Databases were linked using common key variables. The main outcome measure was time to major bleeding (GI, ICH and other bleedings). Secondary outcomes were death, and event-free survival (EFS). Hazard ratios (HR) were derived from adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. We used Inverse Propensity of Treatment Weighting as a stratified sensitivity analysis according to the antiplatelet monotherapy indication: primary prevention without cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, with CV risk factors, and secondary prevention. We observed 250 (0.36%) major haemorrhages, 81 ICH, 106 GI and 63 other types of bleeding. Incidences were twice as high in dual therapy as in monotherapy. Compared to low-dose aspirin ([less than or equal to] 100 mg daily), high-dose (> 100 up to 325 mg daily) was associated with an increased risk of ICH (HR = 1.80, 95%CI 1.10 to 2.95). EFS was improved by high-dose compared to low-dose aspirin (1.41, 1.04 to 1.90 and 1.32, 1.03 to 1.68) and clopidogrel (1.30, 0.73 to 2.3 and 1.7, 1.24 to 2.34) respectively in primary prevention with and without CV risk factors. The incidence of major bleeding and mortality was low. In monotherapy, low-dose aspirin was the safest therapeutic option whatever the indication.

CT pulmonary angiography is a standard diagnostic method for pulmonary embolism, but in pregnant women, this imaging test could expose mother and child to risks from radiation. A diagnostic algorithm allowed up to two thirds of pregnant women with suspected pulmonary embolism to safely avoid CT pulmonary angiography.

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. 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. 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.

Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism requires clinical probability assessment. Implicit assessment is accurate but is not standardized, and current prediction rules have shortcomings. To construct a simple score based entirely on clinical variables and independent from physicians' implicit judgment. Derivation and external validation of the score in 2 independent management studies on pulmonary embolism diagnosis. Emergency departments of 3 university hospitals in Europe. Consecutive patients admitted for clinically suspected pulmonary embolism. Collected data included demographic characteristics, risk factors, and clinical signs and symptoms suggestive of venous thromboembolism. The variables statistically significantly associated with pulmonary embolism in univariate analysis were included in a multivariate logistic regression model. Points were assigned according to the regression coefficients. The score was then externally validated in an independent cohort. The score comprised 8 variables (points): age older than 65 years (1 point), previous deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism (3 points), surgery or fracture within 1 month (2 points), active malignant condition (2 points), unilateral lower limb pain (3 points), hemoptysis (2 points), heart rate of 75 to 94 beats/min (3 points) or 95 beats/min or more (5 points), and pain on lower-limb deep venous palpation and unilateral edema (4 points). In the validation set, the prevalence of pulmonary embolism was 8% in the low-probability category (0 to 3 points), 28% in the intermediate-probability category (4 to 10 points), and 74% in the high-probability category (> or =11 points). Interobserver agreement for the score items was not studied. The proposed score is entirely standardized and is based on clinical variables. It has sustained internal and external validation and should now be tested for clinical usefulness in an outcome study.

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. 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). 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. 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. French Ministry of Health.

Lung point-of-care ultrasonography (L-POCUS) is highly effective in detecting pulmonary peripheral patterns and may allow early identification of patients who are likely to develop an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We hypothesized that L-POCUS performed within the first 48 hours of non-critical patients with suspected COVID-19 would identify those with a high-risk of worsening. POCUSCO was a prospective, multicenter study. Non-critical adult patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were included and had L-POCUS performed within 48 hours following ED presentation. The lung damage severity was assessed using a previously developed score reflecting both the extension and the intensity of lung damage. The primary outcome was the rate of patients requiring intubation or who died within 14 days following inclusion. Among 296 patients, 8 (2.7%) met the primary outcome. The area under the curve (AUC) of L-POCUS was 0.80 [95%CI:0.60-0.94]. The score values which achieved a sensibility >95% in defining low-risk patients and a specificity >95% in defining high-risk patients were <1 and ≥16, respectively. The rate of patients with an unfavorable outcome was 0/95 (0%[95%CI:0-3.9]) for low-risk patients (score = 0), 4/184 (2.17%[95%CI:0.8-5.5]) for intermediate-risk patients (score 1-15) and 4/17 (23.5%[95%CI:11.4-42.4]) for high-risk patients (score ≥16). In confirmed COVID-19 patients (n = 58), the AUC of L-POCUS was 0.97 [95%CI:0.92-1.00]. L-POCUS performed within the first 48 hours following ED presentation allows risk-stratification of patients with non-severe COVID-19.

Although practice guidelines recommend outpatient care for selected, haemodynamically stable patients with pulmonary embolism, most treatment is presently inpatient based. We aimed to assess non-inferiority of outpatient care compared with inpatient care. We undertook an open-label, randomised non-inferiority trial at 19 emergency departments in Switzerland, France, Belgium, and the USA. We randomly assigned patients with acute, symptomatic pulmonary embolism and a low risk of death (pulmonary embolism severity index risk classes I or II) with a computer-generated randomisation sequence (blocks of 2–4) in a 1:1 ratio to initial outpatient (ie, discharged from hospital ≤24 h after randomisation) or inpatient treatment with subcutaneous enoxaparin (≥5 days) followed by oral anticoagulation (≥90 days). The primary outcome was symptomatic, recurrent venous thromboembolism within 90 days; safety outcomes included major bleeding within 14 or 90 days and mortality within 90 days. We used a non-inferiority margin of 4% for a difference between inpatient and outpatient groups. We included all enrolled patients in the primary analysis, excluding those lost to follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00425542. Between February, 2007, and June, 2010, we enrolled 344 eligible patients. In the primary analysis, one (0·6%) of 171 outpatients developed recurrent venous thromboembolism within 90 days compared with none of 168 inpatients (95% upper confidence limit [UCL] 2·7%; p=0·011). Only one (0·6%) patient in each treatment group died within 90 days (95% UCL 2·1%; p=0·005), and two (1·2%) of 171 outpatients and no inpatients had major bleeding within 14 days (95% UCL 3·6%; p=0·031). By 90 days, three (1·8%) outpatients but no inpatients had developed major bleeding (95% UCL 4·5%; p=0·086). Mean length of stay was 0·5 days (SD 1·0) for outpatients and 3·9 days (SD 3·1) for inpatients. In selected low-risk patients with pulmonary embolism, outpatient care can safely and effectively be used in place of inpatient care. Swiss National Science Foundation, Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, and the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Sanofi-Aventis provided free drug supply in the participating European centres.

Abstract Rationale An objective and simple prognostic model for patients with pulmonary embolism could be helpful in guiding initial intensity of treatment. Objectives To develop a clinical prediction rule that accurately classifies patients with pulmonary embolism into categories of increasing risk of mortality and other adverse medical outcomes. Methods We randomly allocated 15,531 inpatient discharges with pulmonary embolism from 186 Pennsylvania hospitals to derivation (67%) and internal validation (33%) samples. We derived our prediction rule using logistic regression with 30-day mortality as the primary outcome, and patient demographic and clinical data routinely available at presentation as potential predictor variables. We externally validated the rule in 221 inpatients with pulmonary embolism from Switzerland and France. Measurements We compared mortality and nonfatal adverse medical outcomes across the derivation and two validation samples. Main Results The prediction rule is based on 11 simple patient characteristics that were independently associated with mortality and stratifies patients with pulmonary embolism into five severity classes, with 30-day mortality rates of 0–1.6% in class I, 1.7–3.5% in class II, 3.2–7.1% in class III, 4.0–11.4% in class IV, and 10.0–24.5% in class V across the derivation and validation samples. Inpatient death and nonfatal complications were ⩽ 1.1% among patients in class I and ⩽ 1.9% among patients in class II. Conclusions Our rule accurately classifies patients with pulmonary embolism into classes of increasing risk of mortality and other adverse medical outcomes. Further validation of the rule is important before its implementation as a decision aid to guide the initial management of patients with pulmonary embolism.

The role of multidetector-row computed tomography (CT) in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism remains to be determined. In this study, the combined use of multidetector-row CT and D-dimer assays allowed pulmonary embolism to be excluded without the need for lower-extremity ultrasonography. The combined use of multidetector-row CT and D-dimer assays allowed pulmonary embolism to be excluded without the need for lower-extremity ultrasonography. Computed tomography (CT) is increasingly being used as the main thoracic imaging technique in suspected pulmonary embolism. 1 – 4 First-generation single-detector–row helical CT scanners have a 90 percent specificity but only a 70 percent sensitivity for pulmonary embolism. 5 – 8 In series in which venous-compression ultrasonography of the lower limbs and single-detector–row helical CT were performed in all patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism, 7 , 9 the proportion of patients with deep venous thrombosis despite findings on CT that were negative for pulmonary embolism was 6 to 9 percent. The implication of this finding is that lower-limb ultrasonography must be combined with CT . . .

Multislice CT (MSCT) combined with D-dimer measurement can safely exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with a low or intermediate clinical probability of this disease. We compared this combination with a strategy in which both a negative venous ultrasonography of the leg and MSCT were needed to exclude pulmonary embolism. We included 1819 consecutive outpatients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism in a multicentre non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing two strategies: clinical probability assessment and either D-dimer measurement and MSCT (DD-CT strategy [n=903]) or D-dimer measurement, venous compression ultrasonography of the leg, and MSCT (DD-US-CT strategy [n=916]). Randomisation was by computer-generated blocks with stratification according to centre. Patients with a high clinical probability according to the revised Geneva score and a negative work-up for pulmonary embolism were further investigated in both groups. The primary outcome was the 3-month thromboembolic risk in patients who were left untreated on the basis of the exclusion of pulmonary embolism by diagnostic strategy. Clinicians assessing outcome were blinded to group assignment. Analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00117169. The prevalence of pulmonary embolism was 20·6% in both groups (189 cases in DD-US-CT group and 186 in DD-CT group). We analysed 855 patients in the DD-US-CT group and 838 in the DD-CT group per protocol. The 3-month thromboembolic risk was 0·3% (95% CI 0·1–1·1) in the DD-US-CT group and 0·3% (0·1–1·2) in the DD-CT group (difference 0·0% [−0·9 to 0·8]). In the DD-US-CT group, ultrasonography showed a deep-venous thrombosis in 53 (9% [7–12]) of 574 patients, and thus MSCT was not undertaken. The strategy combining D-dimer and MSCT is as safe as the strategy using D-dimer followed by venous compression ultrasonography of the leg and MSCT for exclusion of pulmonary embolism. An ultrasound could be of use in patients with a contraindication to CT. Swiss National Research Foundation, Projets Hospitaliers de Recherche Clinique (France), Pneumologie Développement (France).