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.

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

Trends in Discharge Rates for Acute Pulmonary Embolism in U.S. Emergency Departments

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

Epidemiology of pulmonary embolism diagnosis and management among United States emergency departments over an eight-year period

Outpatient versus inpatient treatment for acute pulmonary embolism.

Clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients diagnosed with acute pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: initial report of EMPEROR (Multicenter Emergency Medicine Pulmonary Embolism in the Real World Registry)

Pulmonary embolism: the diagnosis, risk-stratification, treatment and disposition of emergency department patients

Inpatient Management of Pulmonary Embolism: Clinical Characteristics and Mortality in a High-Volume Tertiary Care Center

Emergency department diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism

When I treat a patient with acute pulmonary embolism at home

Characterizing Acute Pulmonary Embolism Cases Diagnosed at an Emergency Department Revisit Using a Statewide Clinical Registry

Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Review

Expanding outpatient management of low-risk pulmonary embolism to the pregnant population: a case series

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

The impact of a pulmonary embolism response team on the efficiency of patient care in the emergency department

Systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism

Management of high-risk pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: A narrative review

The Outcome Of Acute Heart Failure In Patients With Pulmonary Embolism, A Nationwide Analysis

Changes in Care for Acute Pulmonary Embolism Through A Multidisciplinary Pulmonary Embolism Response Team

Presentation, Management and Outcomes of Pediatric Pulmonary Embolus: A Retrospective Review