Abstract
We investigated whether the clinical criteria used in the Hestia study for selection of pulmonary embolism (PE) patients for outpatient treatment could discriminate PE patients with high and low risk for adverse clinical outcome.
We performed a cohort study with PE patients who were triaged with 11 criteria for outpatient treatment. Patients not eligible for outpatient treatment were treated in hospital. Study outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and all-cause mortality during 3 months.
In total, 530 patients were included, of which 297 were treated at home. In the outpatient group, six patients (2.0%, 95% CI 0.7–4.3%) had recurrent venous thromboembolism versus nine in-patients (3.9%, 95% CI 1.9–7.0%). Three patients (1.0%, 95% CI 0.2–2.9) died during the 3-months follow-up in the outpatient group versus 22 patients (9.6%, 95% CI 6.3–14) in the in-patient group (p<0.05). None of the outpatients died as a result of fatal PE versus five (2.2%) in-patients (p<0.05). In the outpatient group, 0.7% (95% CI 0.08–2.4) had major bleeding events versus 4.8% (95% CI 2.4–8.4) of in-patients (p<0.05).
This study showed that the Hestia criteria can discriminate PE patients with low risk from patients with high risk for adverse clinical outcome. The low-risk patients can safely be treated at home.
Footnotes
Support Statement
This study was partially supported by an unrestricted research grant from GlaxoSmithKline, the Netherlands BV. GlaxoSmithKline had no influence in designing and writing the protocol, collection of data, performing the analysis of the study results and writing of the manuscript.
Clinical Trial
This study is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register with identifier number 1319.
Statement of Interest
Statements of interest for M.V. Huisman and for the study itself can be found at www.erj.ersjournals.com/site/misc/statements.xhtml
- Received February 21, 2012.
- Accepted June 1, 2012.
- ©ERS 2013