Predictors and potential advantages of PERT and advanced therapy use in acute pulmonary embolism.

Objectives We sought to examine predictors of pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) utilization and identify those who could benefit from advanced therapy. Background PERT and advanced therapy use remain low. Current risk stratification tools heavily weight age and comorbidities, which may not always correlate with presentation's severity. Methods We prospectively studied patients with CT-confirmed PE between January 2019 and December 2019 at our hospital. PERT activation was left to the treating physician. Multivariable analyses were utilized to identify predictors of PERT activation and advanced therapy. Using the log odd ratio of each significant predictor of advanced therapy, we created a scoring system and a score of 2 was associated with the highest use. Primary outcomes were 30- and 90-day all-cause mortality, readmission, and major bleed. Results Of the 307 patients, PERT was activated in 22.5%. While abnormal vital signs and right ventricular (RV) strain were associated with PERT activation, pulmonary embolism severity index (PESI) was not. Advanced therapy use was significantly higher in the PERT cohort (35% vs 2%). Predictors of advanced therapy use were composite variable (heart rate > 110 or systolic blood pressure 30 or oxygen saturation 0.9. PERT patients with advanced therapy use, when compared to the no-PERT patients who could have qualified (score of 2), had significantly lower 30- and 90-day mortality and 30-day readmission without difference in major bleed. Conclusion PERT has important therapeutic impact, yet no guidelines to direct activation. We recommend a multidisciplinary approach for higher acuity pulmonary embolism cases and physician education regarding PERT and the scope of advanced therapy use.