Effective diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary embolism: Improving patient outcomes

Pulmonary embolism can be life threatening and difficult to diagnose as signs and symptoms are not specific. European guidelines recommend stratification of pulmonary embolism by risk of early mortality. Patients with suspected pulmonary embolism should be assessed for clinical probability of pulmonary embolism using a validated risk score. A low or intermediate clinical probability plus a negative high-sensitivity D-dimer test excludes pulmonary embolism. Anticoagulation is indicated in patients with a positive multidetector computed tomography or high-probability lung scan. An important part of the management of patients with pulmonary embolism has traditionally been anticoagulant treatment with parenteral heparins and oral vitamin K antagonists. Although effective, this dual-drug approach is associated with limitations. Direct oral anticoagulants that may overcome some of these problems have been tested in phase III clinical trials for the treatment of venous thromboembolism. Of these, rivaroxaban and apixaban have demonstrated non-inferiority to standard therapy when given as single-drug approaches for venous thromboembolisnn treatment, and provided significant reductions in major bleeding rates. Dabigatran and edoxaban were non-inferior to standard therapy when given as part of a dual-drug approach after initial parenteral anticoagulation, and reduced clinically relevant bleeding rates. There may be a benefit to extended anticoagulation with direct oral anticoagulants for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism. Registry studies will provide more information on the use of these agents in real-world populations. Accurate diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with pulmonary embolism, together with simplified anticoagulation therapy, is likely to improve outcomes. (C) 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.