Patients with cancer are at risk for thrombotic complications due to a hypercoagulable state. However, the benefit of prophylactic anticoagulation is unclear in many subsets of these patients. For the first episode of acute thromboembolic disease (VTE) in patients with active cancer, anticoagulant therapy is administered for at least three to six months. Herein, we present a 31-year-old female with active, recurrent stage IIIa classical Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL) (nodular sclerosis), previously treated for proximal upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT), presenting for evaluation of shortness of breath and eventually diagnosed with bilateral pulmonary embolism (PE) secondary to a right atrial thrombus. The patient was successfully treated with surgical resection of the thrombus. With this case report, we hope to encourage physicians to use prophylactic indefinite anticoagulation in patients with active cancer and previous DVT, including patients with upper extremity DVT.

Introductory overview for Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal Issue 20.3 on Pulmonary Embolism, written by the issues\' guest editors.

暂无摘要。

Clinicians evaluating acute PE patients often have to identify risks for massive PE, a measure of hemodynamic instability and its consequence, massive PE related adverse clinical events (PEACE). We investigated the association of these risk factors with massive PE and PEACE in a consecutive PE cohort (n = 364).
Massive PE was defined as an acute central clot (proximal to the lobar artery) in a patient with right heart strain and systolic blood pressure ≤ 90 mg. PEACE was defined as any massive PE who died or required one or more of the following: ACLS, assisted ventilation, vasopressor use, thrombolytic therapy, or invasive thrombectomy, within seven days of PE diagnosis. Univariate and multivariate analysis assessing associations between the risk factors (age, gender, comorbidities, PE provoking risks, and whether the PE was felt to be idiopathic) and massive PE or PEACE were performed. Significance was determined at p < 0.05.
Thirteen percent (n = 48) of patients presented with massive PE, and 9% (n = 32) had PEACE. In the final multivariate model, recent invasive procedure (RR = 7.4, p = 0.007), recent hospitalization (RR = 7.3, p = 0.002), and idiopathic PE (RR = 6.5, p = 0.003) were associated with massive PE. Only idiopathic PE (RR = 5.7, p = 0.005) was significantly associated with PEACE. No comorbidities or other PE provoking risks were associated with massive PE or PEACE.
As a take-home message, recent invasive procedure, recent hospitalization, and idiopathic PE were associated with massive PE, and only idiopathic PE was associated with PEACE. Simultaneously, comorbidities like age or chronic cardiopulmonary disease seem not to be associated with massive PE or PEACE.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) includes deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). In this article, we present a case of a patient with an acute DVT who was treated with a therapeutic heparin drip, then developed syncope while in the hospital and found to have massive bilateral PEs. This case aims to arouse the medical staff\'s awareness of the VTE diagnosis even if the patient is fully anticoagulated. We review the indications for DVT hospitalization, heparin infusion monitoring, risk factors for developing PE from DVT, mechanisms of developing PE from DVT while on therapeutic anticoagulation, and signs and treatment of massive PE.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been used to stabilize patients with massive pulmonary embolism though few reports describe this approach. We describe the presentation, management and outcomes of patients who received ECMO for massive pulmonary embolism (PE) in our pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) registry.
We enrolled a consecutive cohort of patients with confirmed PE for whom PERT was activated and selected patients treated with ECMO. We prospectively captured clinical, therapeutic and outcome data at the time of PERT activation and during the follow-up period for up to 365 days.
Thirteen patients who had PERT activation with confirmed PE diagnosis have undergone ECMO since the initiation of our PERT program in 2012. The mean age was 49 ± 19 years. Six (46%) patients were female. All the patients had cardiac arrest, either as an initial presentation or in-hospital cardiac arrest after presentation. All the patients exhibited right ventricular (RV) dilation on echocardiogram with RV hypokinesis. Eight (62%) patients received systemic thrombolysis with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) and three (23%) patients underwent catheter-directed thrombolysis therapy using the EKOS system (EKOS Corporation, Bothell, WA, USA). Four (31%) patients underwent surgical embolectomy. Mean ECMO duration was 5.5 days, ranging from 2-18 days. Thirty-day mortality was 31% and one-year mortality was 54%.
Patients with massive pulmonary embolism who suffer a cardiac arrest have high morbidity and mortality. ECMO can be used in conjunction with systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed therapy or as a bridge to surgical embolectomy.

The impact of the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) model on trainee physician education and autonomy over the management of high risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is unknown. A resident and fellow questionnaire was administered 1 year after PERT implementation. A total of 122 physicians were surveyed, and 73 responded. Even after 12 months of interacting with the PERT consultative service, and having formal instruction in high risk PE management, 51% and 49% of respondents underestimated the true 3-month mortality for sub-massive and massive PE, respectively, and 44% were unaware of a common physical exam finding in patients with PE. Comparing before and after PERT implementation, physicians perceived enhanced confidence in identifying ( p<0.001), and managing ( p=0.003) sub-massive/massive PE, enhanced confidence in treating patients appropriately with systemic thrombolysis ( p=0.04), and increased knowledge of indications for systemic thrombolysis and surgical embolectomy ( p=0.043 and p<0.001, respectively). Respondents self-reported an increased fund of knowledge of high risk PE pathophysiology (77%), and the perception that a multi-disciplinary team improves the care of patients with high risk PE (89%). Seventy-one percent of respondents favored broad implementation of a PERT similar to an acute myocardial infarction team. Overall, trainee physicians at a large institution perceived an enhanced educational experience while managing PE following PERT implementation, believing the team concept is better for patient care.

Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams (PERTs) have emerged to provide rapid multidisciplinary assessment and treatment of PE patients. However, descriptive institutional experience and preliminary outcomes data from such teams are sparse. PERT activations were identified through a retrospective review. Only confirmed submassive or massive PEs were included in the data analysis. In addition to baseline variables, the therapeutic intervention, length of stay (LOS), in-hospital mortality, and bleeding rate/severity were recorded. A total of 124 PERT activations occurred over 20 months: 43 in the first 10 months and 81 in the next 10. A total of 87 submassive (90.8%) and massive (9.2%) PE patients were included. The median age was 65 (51-75 IQR) years. Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) was administered to 25 patients, systemic thrombolysis (ST) to six, and anticoagulation alone (AC) to 54. The median ICU stay and overall LOS were 6 (3-10 IQR) and 7 (4-14 IQR) days, respectively, with no association with any variables except a brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) >100 pg/mL ( p=0.008 ICU LOS; p=0.047 overall LOS). Twelve patients (13.7%) died in the hospital, nine of whom had metastatic or brain cancer, with a median overall LOS of 13 (11-17 IQR) days. There were five major bleeds: one in the CDT group, one in the ST group, and three in the AC group. Overall, (1) PERT activations increased after the first 10 months; (2) BNP >100 pg/mL was associated with a longer LOS; (3) rates of mortality and bleeding did not correlate with treatment; and (4) the majority of in-hospital deaths occurred in patients with advanced cancer.