Get Pulmonary Embolism essential facts below. View Videos or join the Pulmonary Embolism discussion. Add Pulmonary Embolism to your PopFlock.com topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
Blockage of one or more of the arteries to the lungs typically by a blood clot which has traveled from elsewhere in the body
Pulmonary emboli affect about 430,000 people each year in Europe. In the United States, between 300,000 and 600,000 cases occur each year, which results in between 50,000 and 200,000 deaths. Rates are similar in males and females. They become more common as people get older.
Signs and symptoms
Symptoms of pulmonary embolism are typically sudden in onset and may include one or many of the following: dyspnea (shortness of breath), tachypnea (rapid breathing), chest pain of a "pleuritic" nature (worsened by breathing), cough and hemoptysis (coughing up blood). More severe cases can include signs such as cyanosis (blue discoloration, usually of the lips and fingers), collapse, and circulatory instability because of decreased blood flow through the lungs and into the left side of the heart. About 15% of all cases of sudden death are attributable to PE. While PE may present with syncope, less than 1% of syncope cases are due to PE.
As smaller pulmonary emboli tend to lodge in more peripheral areas without collateral circulation, they are more likely to cause lung infarction and small effusions (both of which are painful), but not hypoxia, dyspnea or hemodynamic instability such as tachycardia. Larger PEs, which tend to lodge centrally, typically cause dyspnea, hypoxia, low blood pressure, fast heart rate and fainting, but are often painless because there is no lung infarction due to collateral circulation. The classic presentation for PE with pleuritic pain, dyspnea and tachycardia is likely caused by a large fragmented embolism causing both large and small PEs. Thus, small PEs are often missed because they cause pleuritic pain alone without any other findings and large PEs often missed because they are painless and mimic other conditions often causing ECG changes and small rises in troponin and BNP levels.
PEs are sometimes described as massive, submassive and nonmassive depending on the clinical signs and symptoms. Although the exact definitions of these are unclear, an accepted definition of massive PE is one in which there is hemodynamic instability such as sustained low blood pressure, slowed heart rate, or pulselessness.
A deep vein thrombosis as seen in the right leg is a risk factor for PE
The development of thrombosis is classically due to a group of causes named Virchow's triad (alterations in blood flow, factors in the vessel wall and factors affecting the properties of the blood). Often, more than one risk factor is present.
Alterations in blood flow: immobilization (after surgery, long-haul flight), injury, pregnancy (also procoagulant), obesity (also procoagulant), cancer (also procoagulant)
Factors in the vessel wall: surgery, catheterizations causing direct injury ("endothelial injury")
Factors affecting the properties of the blood (procoagulant state):
After a first PE, the search for secondary causes is usually brief. Only when a second PE occurs, and especially when this happens while still under anticoagulant therapy, a further search for underlying conditions is undertaken. This will include testing ("thrombophilia screen") for Factor V Leiden mutation, antiphospholipid antibodies, protein C and S and antithrombin levels, and later prothrombin mutation, MTHFR mutation, Factor VIII concentration and rarer inherited coagulation abnormalities.
A Hampton hump in a person with a right lower lobe pulmonary embolism
In order to diagnose a pulmonary embolism, a review of clinical criteria to determine the need for testing is recommended. In those who have low risk, age less than 50, heart rate less than 100 beats per minute, oxygen level more than 94% on room air, and no leg swelling, coughing up of blood, surgery or trauma in the last four weeks, previous blood clots, or estrogen use, further testing is not typically needed.
If there are concerns this is followed by testing to determine a likelihood of being able to confirm a diagnosis by imaging, followed by imaging if other tests have shown that there is a likelihood of a PE diagnosis.
The diagnosis of PE is based primarily on validated clinical criteria combined with selective testing because the typical clinical presentation (shortness of breath, chest pain) cannot be definitively differentiated from other causes of chest pain and shortness of breath. The decision to perform medical imaging is based on clinical reasoning, that is, the medical history, symptoms and findings on physical examination, followed by an assessment of clinical probability.
The most commonly used method to predict clinical probability, the Wells score, is a clinical prediction rule, whose use is complicated by multiple versions being available. In 1995, Philip Steven Wells, initially developed a prediction rule (based on a literature search) to predict the likelihood of PE, based on clinical criteria. The prediction rule was revised in 1998 This prediction rule was further revised when simplified during a validation by Wells et al. in 2000. In the 2000 publication, Wells proposed two different scoring systems using cutoffs of 2 or 4 with the same prediction rule. In 2001, Wells published results using the more conservative cutoff of 2 to create three categories. An additional version, the "modified extended version", using the more recent cutoff of 2 but including findings from Wells's initial studies were proposed. Most recently, a further study reverted to Wells's earlier use of a cutoff of 4 points to create only two categories.
There are additional prediction rules for PE, such as the Geneva rule. More importantly, the use of any rule is associated with reduction in recurrent thromboembolism.
Score > 4 -- PE likely. Consider diagnostic imaging.
Score 4 or less -- PE unlikely. Consider D-dimer to rule out PE.
Recommendations for a diagnostic algorithm were published by the PIOPED investigators; however, these recommendations do not reflect research using 64 slice MDCT. These investigators recommended:
Low clinical probability. If negative D-dimer, PE is excluded. If positive D-dimer, obtain MDCT and based treatment on results.
Moderate clinical probability. If negative D-dimer, PE is excluded. However, the authors were not concerned that a negative MDCT with negative D-dimer in this setting has a 5% probability of being false. Presumably, the 5% error rate will fall as 64 slice MDCT is more commonly used. If positive D-dimer, obtain MDCT and based treatment on results.
High clinical probability. Proceed to MDCT. If positive, treat, if negative, more tests are needed to exclude PE. A D-dimer of less than 750 ug/L does not rule out PE in those who are at high risk.
Pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria
The pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) helps assess people in whom pulmonary embolism is suspected, but unlikely. Unlike the Wells score and Geneva score, which are clinical prediction rules intended to risk stratify people with suspected PE, the PERC rule is designed to rule out risk of PE in people when the physician has already stratified them into a low-risk category.
People in this low risk category without any of these criteria may undergo no further testing for PE: low oxygen saturations -- SaO2 <95%, unilateral leg swelling, coughing up blood, prior DVT or PE, recent surgery or trauma, age >50, hormone use, fast heart rate. The rationale behind this decision is that further testing (specifically CT angiogram of the chest) may cause more harm (from radiation exposure and contrast dye) than the risk of PE. The PERC rule has a sensitivity of 97.4% and specificity of 21.9% with a false negative rate of 1.0% (16/1666).
In people with a low or moderate suspicion of PE, a normal D-dimer level (shown in a blood test) is enough to exclude the possibility of thrombotic PE, with a three-month risk of thromboembolic events being 0.14%. D-dimer is highly sensitive but not specific (specificity around 50%). In other words, a positive D-dimer is not synonymous with PE, but a negative D-dimer is, with a good degree of certainty, an indication of absence of a PE. A low pretest probability is also valuable in ruling out PE. The typical cut off is 500 ?g/L, although this varies based on the assay. However, in those over the age of 50, changing the cut-off value to the person's age multiplied by 10 ?g/L (accounting for assay which has been used) is recommended as it decreases the number of falsely positive tests without missing any additional cases of PE.
Troponin levels are increased in between 16-47% with pulmonary embolism.
In typical people who are not known to be at high risk of PE, imaging is helpful to confirm or exclude a diagnosis of PE after simpler first-line tests are used. Medical societies recommend tests such as the D-dimer to first provide supporting evidence for the need for imaging, and imaging would be done if other tests confirmed a moderate or high probability of finding evidence to support a diagnosis of PE.
Ultrasound of the legs can confirm the presence of a PE but cannot rule it out.
CT pulmonary angiography
CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is a pulmonary angiogram obtained using computed tomography (CT) with radiocontrast rather than right heart catheterization. Its advantages are that it is accurate, it is non-invasive, it is more often available, and it may identifying other lung disorders in case there is no pulmonary embolism. The accuracy and non-invasive nature of CTPA also make it advantageous for people who are pregnant.
On CT scan, pulmonary emboli can be classified according to level along the arterial tree.
Segmental and subsegmental pulmonary emboli on both sides
CT pulmonary angiography showing a "saddle embolus" at the bifurcation of the main pulmonary artery and thrombus burden in the lobar arteries on both sides.
Assessing the accuracy of CT pulmonary angiography is hindered by the rapid changes in the number of rows of detectors available in multidetector CT (MDCT) machines. According to a cohort study, single-slice spiral CT may help diagnose detection among people with suspected pulmonary embolism. In this study, the sensitivity was 69% and specificity was 84%. In this study which had a prevalence of detection was 32%, the positive predictive value of 67.0% and negative predictive value of 85.2%. However, this study's results may be biased due to possible incorporation bias, since the CT scan was the final diagnostic tool in people with pulmonary embolism. The authors noted that a negative single slice CT scan is insufficient to rule out pulmonary embolism on its own. A separate study with a mixture of 4 slice and 16 slice scanners reported a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 96%, which means that it is a good test for ruling out a pulmonary embolism if it is not seen on imaging and that it is very good at confirming a pulmonary embolism is present if it is seen. This study noted that additional testing is necessary when the clinical probability is inconsistent with the imaging results. CTPA is non-inferior to VQ scanning, and identifies more emboli (without necessarily improving the outcome) compared to VQ scanning.
Ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy (A) After inhalation of 20 mCi of Xenon-133 gas, scintigraphic images were obtained in the posterior projection, showing uniform ventilation to lungs. (B) After intravenous injection of 4 mCi of Technetium-99m-labeled albumin, scintigraphic images shown here in the posterior projection. This and other views showed decreased activity in multiple regions.
A ventilation/perfusion scan (or V/Q scan or lung scintigraphy) shows that some areas of the lung are being ventilated but not perfused with blood (due to obstruction by a clot). This type of examination is as accurate as multislice CT, but is less used, due to the greater availability of CT technology. It is particularly useful in people who have an allergy to iodinated contrast, impaired kidney function, or are pregnant (due to its lower radiation exposure as compared to CT). The test can be performed with planar two-dimensional imaging, or single photon emission tomography (SPECT) which enables three-dimensional imaging. Hybrid devices combining SPECT and CT (SPECT/CT) further enable anatomic characterization of any abnormality.
Low probability diagnostic tests/non-diagnostic tests
Tests that are frequently done that are not sensitive for PE, but can be diagnostic.
Ultrasonography of the legs, also known as leg doppler, in search of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). The presence of DVT, as shown on ultrasonography of the legs, is in itself enough to warrant anticoagulation, without requiring the V/Q or spiral CT scans (because of the strong association between DVT and PE). This may be a valid approach in pregnancy, in which the other modalities would increase the risk of birth defects in the unborn child. However, a negative scan does not rule out PE, and low-radiation dose scanning may be required if the mother is deemed at high risk of having a pulmonary embolism. The main use of ultrasonography of the legs is therefore in those with clinical symptoms suggestive of a deep vein thrombosis.
Fluoroscopic pulmonary angiography
Selective pulmonary angiogram revealing clot (labeled A) causing a central obstruction in the left main pulmonary artery. ECG tracing shown at bottom.
Electrocardiogram of a person with pulmonary embolism, showing sinus tachycardia of approximately 100 beats per minute, large S wave in Lead I, moderate Q wave in Lead III, inverted T wave in Lead III, and inverted T waves in leads V1 and V3.
The primary use of the ECG is to rule out other causes of chest pain. An electrocardiogram (ECG) is routinely done on people with chest pain to quickly diagnose myocardial infarctions (heart attacks), an important differential diagnosis in an individual with chest pain. While certain ECG changes may occur with PE, none are specific enough to confirm or sensitive enough to rule out the diagnosis. An ECG may show signs of right heart strain or acute cor pulmonale in cases of large PEs -- the classic signs are a large S wave in lead I, a large Q wave in lead III, and an inverted T wave in lead III (S1Q3T3), which occurs in 12-50% of people with the diagnosis, yet also occurs in 12% without the diagnosis.
This is occasionally present (occurring in up to 20% of people), but may also occur in other acute lung conditions, and, therefore, has limited diagnostic value. The most commonly seen signs in the ECG are sinus tachycardia, right axis deviation, and right bundle branch block. Sinus tachycardia, however, is still only found in 8-69% of people with PE.
ECG findings associated with pulmonary emboli may suggest worse prognosis since the six findings identified with RV strain on ECG (heart rate > 100 beats per minute, S1Q3T3, inverted T waves in leads V1-V4, ST elevation in aVR, complete right bundle branch block, and atrial fibrillation) are associated with increased risk of circulatory shock and death.
Cases with inverted T in leads V1-3 are suspected with PE or inferior myocardial infarction. PE cases show inverted T waves in leads II and aVF, but inferior myocardial infarction cases do not show inverted T waves in II and aVF.
In massive and submassive PE, dysfunction of the right side of the heart may be seen on echocardiography, an indication that the pulmonary artery is severely obstructed and the right ventricle, a low-pressure pump, is unable to match the pressure. Some studies (see below) suggest that this finding may be an indication for thrombolysis. Not every person with a (suspected) pulmonary embolism requires an echocardiogram, but elevations in cardiac troponins or brain natriuretic peptide may indicate heart strain and warrant an echocardiogram, and be important in prognosis.
The specific appearance of the right ventricle on echocardiography is referred to as the McConnell's sign. This is the finding of akinesia of the mid-free wall but a normal motion of the apex. This phenomenon has a 77% sensitivity and a 94% specificity for the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism in the setting of right ventricular dysfunction.
Pulmonary embolism may be preventable in those with risk factors. People admitted to hospital may receive preventative medication, including unfractionated heparin, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), or fondaparinux, and anti-thrombosis stockings to reduce the risk of a DVT in the leg that could dislodge and migrate to the lungs.
Following the completion of anticoagulation in those with prior PE, long-term aspirin is useful to prevent recurrence.
Anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay of treatment. Acutely, supportive treatments, such as oxygen or analgesia, may be required. People are often admitted to hospital in the early stages of treatment, and tend to remain under inpatient care until the INR has reached therapeutic levels (if warfarin is used). Increasingly, however, low-risk cases are managed at home in a fashion already common in the treatment of DVT. Evidence to support one approach versus the other is weak.
Anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay of treatment. For many years, vitamin K antagonists (warfarin or less commonly acenocoumarol or phenprocoumon) have been the cornerstone. As vitamin K antagonists do not act immediately, initial treatment is with rapidly acting injectable anticoagulants: unfractionated heparin (UFH), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), or fondaparinux, while oral vitamin K antagonists are initiated and titrated (usually as part of inpatient hospital care) to the international normalized ratio, a test that determines the dose. In terms of injectable treatments, LMWH may reduce bleeding among people with pulmonary embolism as compared to UFH. According to the same review, LMWH reduced the incidence of recurrent thrombotic complications and reduced thrombus size when compared to heparin. There was no difference in overall mortality between participants treated with LMWH and those treated with unfractionated heparin. Vitamin K antagonists require frequent dose adjustment and monitoring of the international normalized ratio (INR). In PE, INRs between 2.0 and 3.0 are generally considered ideal. If another episode of PE occurs under warfarin treatment, the INR window may be increased to e.g. 2.5-3.5 (unless there are contraindications) or anticoagulation may be changed to a different anticoagulant e.g. LMWH.
In recent years, a number of anticoagulants have been introduced that offer similar to warfarin but without a need for titration to the INR. Known as the directly acting oral anticoagulants, these treatments are now preferred over vitamin K antagonists by American professional guidelines. Two of these (rivaroxaban and apixaban) do not require initial heparin or fondaparinux treatment, whereas dabigatran and edoxaban do. A Cochrane review found that there is no evidence of a difference between oral DTIs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, apixaban) and standard anticoagulation in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism.
In people with cancer who develop pulmonary embolism, therapy with a course of LMWH is favored over warfarin or other oral anticoagulants. Similarly, pregnant women are treated with low molecular weight heparin until after delivery to avoid the known teratogenic effects of warfarin, especially in the early stages of pregnancy, but it can may be used while breastfeeding.
Anticoagulation therapy is usually continued for 3-6 months, or "lifelong" if there have been previous DVTs or PEs, or none of the usual transient risk factors is present. In those without a known cause that can be reversed 2 years of treatment may be better than 6 months. For those with small PEs (known as subsegmental PEs) the effects of anticoagulation is unknown as it has not been properly studied as of 2014.
Massive PE causing hemodynamic instability (shock and/or low blood pressure, defined as a systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg or a pressure drop of 40 mmHg for >15 min if not caused by new-onset arrhythmia, hypovolemia or sepsis) is an indication for thrombolysis, the enzymatic destruction of the clot with medication. In this situation, it is the best available treatment in those without contraindications and is supported by clinical guidelines. It is also recommended in those in cardiac arrest with a known PE.
Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) is a new technique found to be relatively safe and effective for massive PEs. This involves accessing the venous system by placing a catheter into a vein in the groin and guiding it through the veins by using fluoroscopic imaging until it is located next to the PE in the lung circulation. Medication that breaks up blood clots is released through the catheter so that its highest concentration is directly next to the pulmonary embolus. CDT is performed by interventional radiologists or vascular surgeons, and in medical centers that offer CDT, it may be offered as a first-line treatment. Catheter-based ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis is being investigated.
The use of thrombolysis in non-massive PEs is still debated. Some have found that the treatment decreases the risk of death and increases the risk of bleeding including intracranial hemorrhage. Others have found no decrease in the risk of death.
Inferior vena cava filter
Used inferior vena cava filter.
There are two situations when an inferior vena cava filter is considered advantageous, and those are if anticoagulant therapy is contraindicated (e.g. shortly after a major operation), or a person has a pulmonary embolus in spite of being anticoagulated. In these instances, it may be implanted to prevent new or existing DVTs from entering the pulmonary artery and combining with an existing blockage. In spite of the device's theoretical advantage of preventing pulmonary emboli, there is a lack of evidence supporting its effectiveness.
Inferior vena cava filters should be removed as soon as it becomes safe to start using anticoagulation. Although modern filters are meant to be retrievable, complications may prevent some from being removed. The long-term safety profile of permanently leaving a filter inside the body is not known.
Surgical management of acute pulmonary embolism (pulmonary thrombectomy) is uncommon and has largely been abandoned because of poor long-term outcomes. However, recently, it has gone through a resurgence with the revision of the surgical technique and is thought to benefit certain people. Chronic pulmonary embolism leading to pulmonary hypertension (known as chronic thromboembolic hypertension) is treated with a surgical procedure known as a pulmonary thromboendarterectomy.
Pulmonary emboli occur in more than 600,000 people in the United States each year. It results in between 50,000 and 200,000 deaths per year in the United States. The risk in those who are hospitalized is around 1%. The rate of fatal pulmonary emboli has declined from 6% to 2% over the last 25 years in the United States.
Large saddle embolus seen in the pulmonary artery (white arrows).
Less than 5 to 10% of symptomatic PEs are fatal within the first hour of symptoms.
There are several markers used for risk stratification and these are also independent predictors of adverse outcome. These include hypotension, cardiogenic shock, syncope, evidence of right heart dysfunction, and elevated cardiac enzymes. Some ECG changes including S1Q3T3 also correlate with worse short-term prognosis. There have been other patient-related factors such as COPD and chronic heart failure thought to also play a role in prognosis.
Prognosis depends on the amount of lung that is affected and on the co-existence of other medical conditions; chronic embolisation to the lung can lead to pulmonary hypertension. After a massive PE, the embolus must be resolved somehow if the patient is to survive. In thrombotic PE, the blood clot may be broken down by fibrinolysis, or it may be organized and recanalized so that a new channel forms through the clot. Blood flow is restored most rapidly in the first day or two after a PE. Improvement slows thereafter and some deficits may be permanent. There is controversy over whether small subsegmental PEs need treatment at all and some evidence exists that patients with subsegmental PEs may do well without treatment.
Once anticoagulation is stopped, the risk of a fatal pulmonary embolism is 0.5% per year.
Mortality from untreated PEs was said to be 26%. This figure comes from a trial published in 1960 by Barrit and Jordan, which compared anticoagulation against placebo for the management of PE. Barritt and Jordan performed their study in the Bristol Royal Infirmary in 1957. This study is the only placebo controlled trial ever to examine the place of anticoagulants in the treatment of PE, the results of which were so convincing that the trial has never been repeated as to do so would be considered unethical. That said, the reported mortality rate of 26% in the placebo group is probably an overstatement, given that the technology of the day may have detected only severe PEs.
The PESI and sPESI scoring tools can estimate mortality of patients. The Geneva prediction rules and Wells criteria are used to calculate a pre-test probability of patients to predict who has a pulmonary embolism. These scores are tools to be used with clinical judgment in deciding diagnostic testing and types of therapy. The PESI algorithm comprises 11 routinely available clinical variables. It puts the subjects into one of five classes (I-V), with 30-day mortality ranging from 1.1% to 24.5%. Those in classes I and II are low-risk and those in classes III-V are high-risk.
^ abcdeGoldhaber SZ (2005). "Pulmonary thromboembolism". In Kasper DL, Braunwald E, Fauci AS, et al. (eds.). Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine (16th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. pp. 1561-65. ISBN978-0-07-139140-5.
^ abRaskob GE, Angchaisuksiri P, Blanco AN, Buller H, Gallus A, Hunt BJ, et al. (November 2014). "Thrombosis: a major contributor to global disease burden". Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 34 (11): 2363-71. doi:10.1161/atvbaha.114.304488. PMID25304324.
^ abLewis S, Dirksen S, Heitkemper M, Bucher L (2014). Medical-surgical nursing: Assessment and management of clinical problems (9 ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby. p. 552. ISBN978-0-323-08678-3.
^Oqab Z, Ganshorn H, Sheldon R (April 2018). "Prevalence of pulmonary embolism in patients presenting with syncope. A systematic review and meta-analysis". The American Journal of Emergency Medicine. 36 (4): 551-555. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2017.09.015. PMID28947223.
^ abJaff MR, McMurtry MS, Archer SL, Cushman M, Goldenberg N, Goldhaber SZ, et al. (April 2011). American Heart Association Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation, American Heart Association Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, American Heart Association Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. "Management of massive and submassive pulmonary embolism, iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association". Circulation. 123 (16): 1788-830. doi:10.1161/CIR.0b013e318214914f. PMID21422387.
^Ferri, F (2012). Ferri's Clinical Advisor. St. Louis: Mosby's.
^ abRaja AS, Greenberg JO, Qaseem A, Denberg TD, Fitterman N, Schuur JD (November 2015). "Evaluation of Patients With Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Best Practice Advice From the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians". Annals of Internal Medicine. 163 (9): 701-11. doi:10.7326/M14-1772. PMID26414967.
^ abcStein PD, Woodard PK, Weg JG, Wakefield TW, Tapson VF, Sostman HD, et al. (January 2007). "Diagnostic pathways in acute pulmonary embolism: recommendations of the PIOPED II Investigators". Radiology. 242 (1): 15-21. doi:10.1148/radiol.2421060971. PMID17185658.
^ abcdeKonstantinides SV, Torbicki A, Agnelli G, Danchin N, Fitzmaurice D, Galiè N, et al. (November 2014). "2014 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism". European Heart Journal. 35 (43): 3033-69, 3069a-3069k. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu283. PMID25173341.
^ abWells PS, Ginsberg JS, Anderson DR, Kearon C, Gent M, Turpie AG, et al. (December 1998). "Use of a clinical model for safe management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism". Annals of Internal Medicine. 129 (12): 997-1005. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-129-12-199812150-00002. PMID9867786.
^ abcdeWells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, Ginsberg JS, Kearon C, Gent M, et al. (March 2000). "Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED D-dimer". Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 83 (3): 416-20. doi:10.1055/s-0037-1613830. PMID10744147.
^ abWells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, Stiell I, Dreyer JF, Barnes D, et al. (July 2001). "Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside without diagnostic imaging: management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism presenting to the emergency department by using a simple clinical model and d-dimer". Annals of Internal Medicine. 135 (2): 98-107. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-135-2-200107170-00010. PMID11453709.
^Sanson BJ, Lijmer JG, Mac Gillavry MR, Turkstra F, Prins MH, Büller HR (February 2000). "Comparison of a clinical probability estimate and two clinical models in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. ANTELOPE-Study Group". Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 83 (2): 199-203. doi:10.1055/s-0037-1613785. PMID10739372.
^ abvan Belle A, Büller HR, Huisman MV, Huisman PM, Kaasjager K, Kamphuisen PW, et al. (January 2006). "Effectiveness of managing suspected pulmonary embolism using an algorithm combining clinical probability, D-dimer testing, and computed tomography". JAMA. 295 (2): 172-9. doi:10.1001/jama.295.2.172. PMID16403929.
^Yap KS, Kalff V, Turlakow A, Kelly MJ (September 2007). "A prospective reassessment of the utility of the Wells score in identifying pulmonary embolism". The Medical Journal of Australia. 187 (6): 333-6. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb01274.x. PMID17874979.
^ abcdStein PD, Woodard PK, Weg JG, Wakefield TW, Tapson VF, Sostman HD, et al. (January 2007). "Diagnostic pathways in acute pulmonary embolism: recommendations of the PIOPED II Investigators". Radiology. 242 (1): 15-21. doi:10.1148/radiol.2421060971. PMID17185658.
^van Es N, van der Hulle T, Büller HR, Klok FA, Huisman MV, Galipienzo J, Di Nisio M (February 2017). "Is stand-alone D-dimer testing safe to rule out acute pulmonary embolism?". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 15 (2): 323-328. doi:10.1111/jth.13574. PMID27873439.
^Kline JA, Mitchell AM, Kabrhel C, Richman PB, Courtney DM (August 2004). "Clinical criteria to prevent unnecessary diagnostic testing in emergency department patients with suspected pulmonary embolism". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2 (8): 1247-55. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2004.00790.x. PMID15304025.
^Kline JA, Courtney DM, Kabrhel C, Moore CL, Smithline HA, Plewa MC, et al. (May 2008). "Prospective multicenter evaluation of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 6 (5): 772-80. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2008.02944.x. PMID18318689.
^Carrier M, Righini M, Djurabi RK, Huisman MV, Perrier A, Wells PS, et al. (May 2009). "VIDAS D-dimer in combination with clinical pre-test probability to rule out pulmonary embolism. A systematic review of management outcome studies". Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 101 (5): 886-92. doi:10.1160/TH-08-10-0689. PMID19404542.
^Schrecengost JE, LeGallo RD, Boyd JC, Moons KG, Gonias SL, Rose CE, Bruns DE (September 2003). "Comparison of diagnostic accuracies in outpatients and hospitalized patients of D-dimer testing for the evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism". Clinical Chemistry. 49 (9): 1483-90. doi:10.1373/49.9.1483. PMID12928229.
^van Es N, van der Hulle T, van Es J, den Exter PL, Douma RA, Goekoop RJ, et al. (August 2016). "Wells Rule and d-Dimer Testing to Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Individual-Patient Data Meta-analysis". Annals of Internal Medicine. 165 (4): 253-61. doi:10.7326/m16-0031. PMID27182696.
^Werman HA, Karren K, Mistovich J (2014). "Other Conditions That Cause Respiratory Distress: Pulmonary Embolism". In Werman A. Howard, Mistovich J, Karren K (eds.). Prehospital Emergency Care, 10e. Pearson Education, Inc. p. 456.
^ abTorbicki A, Perrier A, Konstantinides S, Agnelli G, Galiè N, Pruszczyk P, et al. (September 2008). "Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)". European Heart Journal. 29 (18): 2276-315. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn310. PMID18757870.
^ abStein PD, Freeman LM, Sostman HD, Goodman LR, Woodard PK, Naidich DP, et al. (December 2009). "SPECT in acute pulmonary embolism". Journal of Nuclear Medicine (Review). 50 (12): 1999-2007. doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.063958. PMID19949025.
^Da Costa Rodrigues J, Alzuphar S, Combescure C, Le Gal G, Perrier A (September 2016). "Diagnostic characteristics of lower limb venous compression ultrasonography in suspected pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 14 (9): 1765-72. doi:10.1111/jth.13407. PMID27377039.
^Van Strijen MJ, De Monye W, Kieft GJ, Pattynama PM, Prins MH, Huisman MV (January 2005). "Accuracy of single-detector spiral CT in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a prospective multicenter cohort study of consecutive patients with abnormal perfusion scintigraphy". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 3 (1): 17-25. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2004.01064.x. PMID15634261.
^ abStein PD, Fowler SE, Goodman LR, Gottschalk A, Hales CA, Hull RD, et al. (June 2006). "Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism". The New England Journal of Medicine. 354 (22): 2317-27. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa052367. PMID16738268.
^Anderson DR, Kahn SR, Rodger MA, Kovacs MJ, Morris T, Hirsch A, et al. (December 2007). "Computed tomographic pulmonary angiography vs ventilation-perfusion lung scanning in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a randomized controlled trial". JAMA. 298 (23): 2743-53. doi:10.1001/jama.298.23.2743. PMID18165667.
^Leung AN, Bull TM, Jaeschke R, Lockwood CJ, Boiselle PM, Hurwitz LM, et al. (November 2011). "An official American Thoracic Society/Society of Thoracic Radiology clinical practice guideline: evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism in pregnancy". American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 184 (10): 1200-8. doi:10.1164/rccm.201108-1575ST. PMID22086989.
^Worsley DF, Alavi A, Aronchick JM, Chen JT, Greenspan RH, Ravin CE (October 1993). "Chest radiographic findings in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: observations from the PIOPED Study". Radiology. 189 (1): 133-6. doi:10.1148/radiology.189.1.8372182. PMID8372182.
^Konstantinides SV, Torbicki A, Agnelli G, Danchin N, Fitzmaurice D, Galiè N, et al. (November 2014). "2014 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism". European Heart Journal. 35 (43): 3033-69, 3069a-3069k. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu283. PMID25173341. Pulmonary angiography has for decades remained the 'gold standard' for the diagnosis or exclusion of PE, but is rarely performed now as less-invasive CT angiography offers similar diagnostic accuracy.
^Rodger M, Makropoulos D, Turek M, Quevillon J, Raymond F, Rasuli P, Wells PS (October 2000). "Diagnostic value of the electrocardiogram in suspected pulmonary embolism". The American Journal of Cardiology. 86 (7): 807-9, A10. doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(00)01090-0. PMID11018210.
^Amal Mattu; Deepi Goyal; Barrett, Jeffrey W.; Joshua Broder; DeAngelis, Michael; Peter Deblieux; Gus M. Garmel; Richard Harrigan; David Karras; Anita L'Italien; David Manthey (2007). Emergency medicine: avoiding the pitfalls and improving the outcomes. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Pub./BMJ Books. p. 10. ISBN978-1-4051-4166-6.
^Lankeit M, Jiménez D, Kostrubiec M, Dellas C, Hasenfuss G, Pruszczyk P, Konstantinides S (December 2011). "Predictive value of the high-sensitivity troponin T assay and the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index in hemodynamically stable patients with acute pulmonary embolism: a prospective validation study". Circulation. 124 (24): 2716-24. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.051177. PMID22082681.
^McConnell MV, Solomon SD, Rayan ME, Come PC, Goldhaber SZ, Lee RT (August 1996). "Regional right ventricular dysfunction detected by echocardiography in acute pulmonary embolism". The American Journal of Cardiology. 78 (4): 469-73. doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(96)00339-6. PMID8752195.
^ abLavonas EJ, Drennan IR, Gabrielli A, Heffner AC, Hoyte CO, Orkin AM, et al. (November 2015). "Part 10: Special Circumstances of Resuscitation: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care". Circulation. 132 (18 Suppl 2): S501-18. doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000264. PMID26472998.
^Kuo WT, Gould MK, Louie JD, Rosenberg JK, Sze DY, Hofmann LV (November 2009). "Catheter-directed therapy for the treatment of massive pulmonary embolism: systematic review and meta-analysis of modern techniques". Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. 20 (11): 1431-40. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2009.08.002. PMID19875060.
^Engelberger RP, Kucher N (March 2014). "Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis for acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review". European Heart Journal. 35 (12): 758-64. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu029. PMID24497337.
^ abNakamura S, Takano H, Kubota Y, Asai K, Shimizu W (July 2014). "Impact of the efficacy of thrombolytic therapy on the mortality of patients with acute submassive pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 12 (7): 1086-95. doi:10.1111/jth.12608. PMID24829097.
^Chatterjee S, Chakraborty A, Weinberg I, Kadakia M, Wilensky RL, Sardar P, et al. (June 2014). "Thrombolysis for pulmonary embolism and risk of all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage: a meta-analysis". JAMA. 311 (23): 2414-21. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.5990. PMID24938564.
^Le Gal G, Righini M, Parent F, van Strijen M, Couturaud F (April 2006). "Diagnosis and management of subsegmental pulmonary embolism". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 4 (4): 724-31. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01819.x. PMID16634736.
^Perrier A, Bounameaux H (June 2006). "Accuracy or outcome in suspected pulmonary embolism". The New England Journal of Medicine. 354 (22): 2383-5. doi:10.1056/NEJMe068076. PMID16738276.
^White RH (October 2008). "Risk of fatal pulmonary embolism was 0.49 per 100 person-years after discontinuing anticoagulant therapy for venous thromboembolism". Evidence-Based Medicine. 13 (5): 154. doi:10.1136/ebm.13.5.154. PMID18836122.