Abstract:Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common life-threatening cardiovascular condition, with an incidence of 23 to 69 new cases per 100,000 people each year. For selected low-risk patients with acute PE, outpatient treatment might provide several advantages over traditional inpatient treatment, such as reduction of hospitalisations, substantial cost savings, and improvements in health-related quality of life. This is an update of the review first published in 2014. To compare the efficacy and safety of outpatient versus inpatient treatment in low-risk patients with acute PE for the outcomes of all-cause and PE-related mortality; bleeding; adverse events such as haemodynamic instability; recurrence of PE; and patients' satisfaction. The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers, to 26 March 2018. We also undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. We included randomised controlled trials of outpatient versus inpatient treatment of adults (aged 18 years and over) diagnosed with low-risk acute PE. Two review authors selected relevant trials, assessed methodological quality, and extracted and analysed data. We calculated effect estimates using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), or mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. We used standardised mean differences (SMDs) to combine trials that measured the same outcome but used different methods. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. One new study was identified for this 2018 update, bringing the total number of included studies to two and the total number of participants to 451. Both trials discharged patients randomised to the outpatient group within 36 hours of initial triage and both followed participants for 90 days. One study compared the same treatment regimens in both outpatient and inpatient groups, and the other study used different treatment regimes. There was no clear difference in treatment effect for the outcomes of short-term mortality (30 days) (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.98, P = 0.49; low-quality evidence), long-term mortality (90 days) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.58, P = 0.99, low-quality evidence), major bleeding at 14 days (RR 4.91, 95% CI 0.24 to 101.57, P = 0.30; low-quality evidence) and at 90 days (RR 6.88, 95% CI 0.36 to 132.14, P = 0.20; low-quality evidence), minor bleeding (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.79; P = 0.96, low-quality evidence), recurrent PE within 90 days (RR 2.95, 95% CI 0.12 to 71.85, P = 0.51, low-quality evidence), and participant satisfaction (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.04, P = 0.39; moderate-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because the CIs were wide and included treatment effects in both directions, the sample sizes and numbers of events were small, and because the effect of missing data and the absence of publication bias could not be verified. PE-related mortality, and adverse effects such as haemodynamic instability and compliance, were not assessed by the included studies. Currently, only low-quality evidence is available from two published randomised controlled trials on outpatient versus inpatient treatment in low-risk patients with acute PE. The studies did not provide evidence of any clear difference between the interventions in overall mortality, bleeding and recurrence of PE.

When I treat a patient with acute pulmonary embolism at home

Trends in home treatment and early discharge of patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism

Safety of treating acute pulmonary embolism at home: an individual patient data meta-analysis

Outpatient management of cancer-associated pulmonary embolism: A post-hoc analysis from the HOME-PE trial

Risk assessment and management strategies in older patients with acute pulmonary embolism

Outpatient Management of Patients Following Diagnosis of Acute Pulmonary Embolism

Outpatient Management of Emergency Department Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Variation, Patient Characteristics, and Outcomes

Outpatient versus inpatient treatment for acute pulmonary embolism.

Triaging acute pulmonary embolism for home treatment by Hestia or simplified PESI criteria: the HOME-PE randomized trial

Intensive Care Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism: An Update Based on the Revised AWMF S2k Guideline

Healthcare resource utilisation and associated costs after low-risk pulmonary embolism: pre-specified analysis of the Home Treatment of Pulmonary Embolism (HoT-PE) study

Effect of a Physiotherapist-Guided Home-Based Exercise Intervention on Physical Capacity and Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism

Home Treatment for Active Cancer Patients With Low-Risk Pulmonary Embolism - A Predetermined Companion Report From the ONCO PE Trial

The creation and implementation of an outpatient pulmonary embolism treatment protocol

Risk Stratification and Management of Intermediate- and High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism

Pulmonary Embolism: An Update Based on the Revised AWMF-S2k Guideline

Risk Stratification and Management of Intermediate-Risk Acute Pulmonary Embolism

Using a Fibrinolysis Delivery Catheter in Pulmonary Embolism Treatment for Measurement of Pulmonary Artery Hemodynamics

Percutaneous catheter-directed treatment in intermediate-high risk acute pulmonary embolism. Hemodynanical and right heart function-related parameters changes and short-term outcomes

Outpatient Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients with Persisting Symptoms after Pulmonary Embolism