Limitations of the PESI Index in Determining the Optimal Treatment Tactics for Pulmonary Embolism: Data from the Russian SIRENA Registry

Aim: To study approaches to the management of patients with pulmonary embolism at the hospital stage with varying degrees of risk of death in the clinical practice of Russian hospitals.

Design: Registry, multicentre, prospective observational study.

Materials and methods. The study included 571 patients (SIRENA registry database), in all patients the risk of death was calculated according to the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI). A comparative analysis was carried out in three groups of patients: with low (PESI I + II class), intermediate (PESI III class) and high risk (PESI IV + V class).

Results. Among patients with low and high risk for PESI who received thrombolytic therapy (TLT), fewer people died than among those who did not: 2 vs. 5.9%, respectively, and 13 vs. 30% (p = 0.01), respectively. In the group of intermediate-risk patients with TLT, all remained alive, and among patients without TLT, 25.8% died (p = 0.033). In patients at low risk for PESI, the most common cause of thrombolysis was massive thrombosis of the main branches and trunk of the pulmonary artery (PA) (3.9%), the first diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome with ST elevation (0.8%), and persistent signs of respiratory failure against the background of anticoagulant therapy (5.5%). At intermediate risk according to PESI, the most common reasons for thrombolysis were the presence of respiratory failure with low blood pressure (6.2%) and massive thrombosis of the pulmonary arteries (2.7%).

Conclusion. In patients with intermediate and high risk according to the PESI index, a significant efficacy of systemic TLT in reducing the risk of in-hospital mortality has been proven. Patients with low and intermediate risk according to PESI need to conduct a more thorough analysis of the presence of comorbidities and risk factors, additional instrumental and laboratory parameters, aggravating factors (central massive pulmonary thrombosis in combination with a respiratory failure clinic), followed by consideration of the possibility and feasibility of TLT.

1. Nikulina N.N., Terekhovskaya Yu.V. Epidemiology of pulmonary embolism in today’s context: analysis of incidence, mortality and problems of their study. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2019;6:103–8. (in Russian). DOI: 10.15829/1560-4071-2019-6-103-108

2. Berns S.A., Shmidt E.A., Nagirniyak O.A. Management of patients with pulmonary embolism in a cardiac hospital from position of modern European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2015;4:90–6. (in Russian). DOI: 10.17802/2306-1278-2015-4-90-96

3. Agnelli G., Gitt A.K., Bauersachs R., Fronk E.M. et al. The management of acute venous thromboembolism in clinical practice — study rationale and protocol of the European PREFER in VTE Registry. Thromb. J. 2015;13:41. DOI: 10.1186/s12959-015-0071-z

4. Bikdeli B., Jimenez D., Hawkins M., Ortíz S. et al. Rationale, design and methodology of the computerized registry of patients with venous thromboembolism (RIETE). Thromb. Haemost. 2018;118(1):214–24. DOI: 10.1160/TH17-07-0511

5. Erlikh A.D., Atakanova A.N., Neeshpapa A.G., Cherepanova N.A. et al. Russian register of acute pulmonary embolism SIRENA: characteristics of patients and in-hospital treatment. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2020;25(10):3849. (in Russian). DOI: 10.15829/1560-4071-2020-3849

6. Buryachkovskaya L.I., Lomakin N.V., Sumarokov A.B., Shirokov E.A. Algorithms and scores for risk of thrombosis and hemorrhage in cardiology and neurology. Practical guide. M.; 2018. 102 p. (in Russian)

7. Jiménez D., Lobo J.L., Barrios D., Prandoni P. et al. Risk stratification of patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Intern. Emerg. Med. 2016;11(1):11–18. DOI: 10.1007/s11739-015-1388-0

8. Kochmareva E.A., Kokorin V.A., Volkova A.L., Matyushkov N.S. et al. Modern possibilities of prediction of clinical course and outcome of pulmonary embolism. Medical News of North Caucasus. 2017;12(4):476–83. (in Russian). DOI: 10.14300/mnnc.2017.12133

9. Jara-Palomares L., Alfonso M., Maestre A., Jiménez D. et al. Comparison of seven prognostic tools to identify low-risk pulmonary embolism in patients aged < 50 years. Sci. Rep. 2019;9(1):20064. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-55213-8

10. Jen W.-Y., Jeon Y.-S., Kojodjojo P., Lee E.H.E. et al. A new model for risk stratification of patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Clin. Appl. Thromb. Hemost. 2018;24(9suppl.):S277–84. DOI: 10.1177/1076029618808922

11. Koć M., Kostrubiec M., Elikowski W., Meneveau N. et al. Outcome of patients with right heart thrombi: the Right Heart Thrombi European Registry. Eur. Respir. J. 2016;47(3):869–75. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00819-2015

12. Zuin M., Rigatelli G., Picariello C., Carraro M. et al. Prognostic role of a new risk index for the prediction of 30-day cardiovascular mortality in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: the Age-Mean Arterial Pressure Index (AMAPI). Heart Vessels. 2017;32(12):1478–87. DOI: 10.1007/s00380-017-1012-5

13. Subramanian M., Gopalan S., Ramadurai S., Arthur P. et al. Derivation and validation of a novel prediction model to identify low-risk patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Am. J. Cardiol. 2017;120(04):676–81. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.05.043

14. Mullova I.S., Cherepanova N.A., Pavlova T.V., Khokhlunov S.M. et al. GRACE score in assessing the risk of hospital outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2018;23(12):25–31. (in Russian). DOI: 10.15829/1560-4071-2018-12-25-31

15. Erkens P.M., Gandara E., Wells P.S., Shen A.Y.J. et al. Does the pulmonary embolism severity index accurately identify low risk patients eligible for outpatient treatment? Thromb. Res. 2012;129(6):710–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2011.08.025

16. Elias A., Mallett S., Daoud-Elias M., Poggi J.N. et al. Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2016;6(4):e010324. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010324

17. De Araujo Soriano L., Castro T.T., Vilalva K., Borges M.C. et al. Validation of the pulmonary embolism severity index for risk stratification after acute pulmonary embolism in a cohort of patients in Brazil. J. Bras. Pneumol. 2019;45(1):e20170251. DOI: 10.1590/1806-3713/e20170251

18. Tamizifar B., Fereyduni F., Esfahani M.A., Kheyri S. Comparing three clinical prediction rules for primarily predicting the 30-daymortality of patients with pulmonary embolism: The “Simplified Revised Geneva Score,” the “Original PESI,” and the “Simplified PESI”. Adv. Biomed. Res. 2016;5:137. DOI: 10.4103/2277-9175.187372

19. Vinson D.R., Ballard D.W., Mark D.G., Huang J. et al. Risk stratifying emergency department patients with acute pulmonary embolism: does the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index perform as well as the original? Thromb. Res. 2016;148:1–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2016.09.023

20. Dahhan T., Siddiqui I., Tapson V.F., Velazquez E.J. et al. Clinical and echocardiographic predictors of mortality in acute pulmonary embolism. Cardiovasc. Ultrasound. 2016;14(1):44. DOI: 10.1186/s12947-016-0087-y

21. Al Dandan O., Hassan A., AbuAlola H., Alzaki A. et al. Clinical and imaging profiles of pulmonary embolism: a single-institution experience. Int. J. Emerg. Med. 2020;13(1):47. DOI: 10.1186/s12245-020-00303-y

22. Botova S.N., Pochinka I.G., Dvornikova M.I., Strongin L.G. et al. Clinical attributes of pulmonary embolism according to the hospital register. Cardiology: News, Opinions, Training. 2016;3(10):95–9. (in Russian)

23. Konstantinides S.V., Barco S., Lankeit M., Meyer G. Management of pulmonary embolism: an update. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2016;67(8):976–90. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.11.061

24. Konstantinides S.V., Wärntges S. Acute phase treatment of venous thromboembolism: advanced therapy. Systemic fibrinolysis and pharmacomechanical therapy. Thromb. Haemost. 2015;113(6):1202–9. DOI: 10.1160/TH14-11-0998