The Challenge of Intermediate-Risk Pulmonary Embolism

• Published in: American journal of therapeutics Vol. 30; no. 2; pp. e134 - e144
• Main Authors: Weintraub, Spencer F., You, Joseph, Wilson, Sean, Galmer, Andrew
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Journal of Therapeutics 01-03-2023
• Subjects: Anticoagulants - therapeutic use; Embolectomy - adverse effects; Embolectomy - methods; Fibrinolytic Agents - therapeutic use; Humans; Pulmonary Embolism - therapy; Thrombectomy - adverse effects; Thrombolytic Therapy - methods; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1075-2765; 1536-3686
• DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001605

Intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism is a common disease that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality; however, a standardized treatment protocol is not well-established.
Treatments available for intermediate-risk pulmonary embolisms include anticoagulation, systemic thrombolytics, catheter-directed therapies, surgical embolectomy, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Despite these options, there is no clear consensus on the optimal indication and timing of these interventions.
Anticoagulation remains the cornerstone of treatment for pulmonary embolism; however, over the past 2 decades, there have been advances in the safety and efficacy of catheter-directed therapies. For massive pulmonary embolism, systemic thrombolytics and, sometimes, surgical thrombectomy are considered first-line treatments. Patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism are at high risk of clinical deterioration; however, it is unclear whether anticoagulation alone is sufficient. The optimal treatment of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism in the setting of hemodynamic stability with right heart strain present is not well-defined. Therapies such as catheter-directed thrombolysis and suction thrombectomy are being investigated given their potential to offload right ventricular strain. Several studies have recently evaluated catheter-directed thrombolysis and embolectomies and demonstrated the efficacy and safety of these interventions. Here, we review the literature on the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolisms and the evidence behind those interventions.
There are many treatments available in the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Although the current literature does not favor 1 treatment as superior, multiple studies have shown growing data to support catheter-directed therapies as potential options for these patients. Multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams remain a key feature in improving the selection of advanced therapies and optimization of care.