July28  Unitedkingdom  2021 

*WearMask,KeepSanitizeYourHands*

Abstract Volume: 2 Issue: 3 ISSN:

Is it time for Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) …A Review Article

Naved Y Hasan. MD*


*Corresponding Author: Dr. Naved Y Hasan. MD*, Department of ICU, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.


Received Date:  February 10, 2021

Publication Date: March 01, 2021


Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to determine the best Pulmonary Embolism Strategy for diagnosis and to optimize further management.

Method: Data was extracted from KAMC Registry regarding imaging studies done for diagnosing Pulmonary Embolism.

Result: During 2017-2019 at King Abdullah Medical City, 347 patients underwent CTPA studies for PE diagnosis without applying CDRs (Clinical Decision Rules). Only 53 studies (15.2%) were positive for PE, while 294 studies (84.8%) were negative for PE. Because of the large number of imaging studies done with a substantial number of negative studies, we elected to have a unified protocol, multidisciplinary team approach and evidence-based consensus decision for the appropriate management of acute PE. A task force was activated for this purpose to formulate a team and implement the best evidence-based guidelines.

Is it time for Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) …A Review Article

Abbreviations and Keywords:

PERT: Pulmonary Embolism Response Team

KAMC: King Abdullah Medical City

PE: Pulmonary Embolism

CTPA: CT Pulmonary Angiogram

 

Introduction

• Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, and the management of acute PE remains poorly standardized.

• PE response teams (PERTs) are being established around the world to provide rapid, individualized, and expert-based care for patients with acute PE.

• Preliminary results from early adopters suggest that PERTs feasible and facilitate access to advanced therapies.

• Research is needed to determine if the PERT approach improves survival, reduces long-term complications, and is cost-effective. 

 

Pert Multidisciplinary Team 

• Pulmonary 

• Critical Care/Intensive Care Unit

• Cardiology

• Radiology/interventional radiology

• Cardiac surgery

• Primary Physician

 

Results and Guidelines

Table 1 (Refer Attached Figure 3)

Table 2 (Refer Attached Figure 4)

Figure 1

Figure 2


Discussion

The National PERT Consortium was established in 2015, when different institutions across the United States met in Boston, Massachusetts, with the intent to collaborate, guide, and influence PE management and research. Currently, the concept of PERT has been adopted in more than 100 centers worldwide. To date, around 12 major Retrospective and Prospective studies of the PERT Program have been conducted.


Why we need Pert?

  • PE has long been called a silent killer.
  • It is the third most common cause of death from CVDs, just after a heart attack and stroke, but with prompt diagnosis and treatment, survival rates can be significantly improved.
  • To ensure the prompt diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary embolism.
  • To standardize PE clinical care. It will include guidelines for all stages of PE, including early diagnostics, management and treatment, and post-PE follow up.
  • To coordinate and expedite the treatment of acute PE with a balanced team of physicians from a variety of specialties.
  • This multidisciplinary approach allows for:
    • Rapid evaluation of risks
    • Formulation of a treatment plan
    • Mobilization of the necessary resources to provide the highest level of care to those in need
    • Improving the clinical outcome of PE
    • Reducing the cost related PE diagnosis and management

 

Conclusion

Thus far, numerous descriptive and retrospective studies demonstrate that it is feasible to create such a multidisciplinary team and that there are many ways to establish a PERT. The formation of the PERT Consortium is a venue through which these teams together can collect data that can help inform treatment decisions, influence guidelines and algorithms, guide hospital policy, and shape future research in PE care. This additional evidence will help evaluate the value of this innovative model and determine if this collaborative approach improves PE outcomes, positively changes clinical care, is cost-effective, enriches patients’ quality of life, and advances the science of PE treatment.

Data analysis from several studies showed that following PERT implementation, patients with intermediate and high-risk acute PE:

a. Received more aggressive and advanced treatment modalities

b. Received more efficient patient care

c. Had a trend towards decreased mortality compared to before PERT


Acknowledgment

I would like to thank the following staff for their significant input for this article.

Dr. Masood Iqbal, Assistant Consultant ICU KAMC, Makkah Saudi Arabia, for providing data from KAMC Registry and Designing and Drafting the article.

Dr. Adel Hussain, Consultant ICU, KAMC, Makkah Saudi Arabia, for helping to formulate the Data.

 

Conflict of Interest: The author has declared no conflict of interest.


Funding: The author has not received any funding from any source.

 

References

1. Kabrhel C, Rosovsky R, Channick R, Jaff MR, Weinberg I, Sundt T, et. “multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team: initial 30-month experience with a novel approach to delivery of care to patients with submassive and massive pulmonary embolism”.. 1.

2.G, Giri J, Courtney DM, Naydenov S, Wood T, Rosovsky R, etal. “nuts and bolts of running a pulmonary embolism response team: results from an organizational survey of the National PERT Consortium members”. Pract. 1995;45:76–80.

3.GD, Kabrhel C, Courtney DM, Naydenov S, Wood T, Rosovsky R, etal. Diversity in the pulmonary embolism response team model: an organizational Survey of the National PERT Consortium members.. 2016;150:1414–7.

4.T, Dudzinski DM, Jaff MR, Rosenfield K, Channick R, Baker J, et. “Massachusetts General Hospital Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (MGH PERT): creation of a multidisciplinary program to improve care of patients with massive and submassive pulmonary embolism”.Pract. 2014;42:31–7.

5.R, Borges J, Kabrhel C, Rosenfield K. “embolism response team: inpatient structure, outpatient follow-up, and is it the current standard of care?” Chest Med. 2018;39:621–30.

6.DM, Horowitz JM.-up, organization and performance of a multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response team for the diagnosis and treatment of acute pulmonary embolism.Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2017;70:9–13.

7.DM, Piazza G. pulmonary embolism response teams.. 2016;133:98–103.

8.T, Winokur RS, Quencer KB, Madoff DC. assessment: clinical presentation, imaging diagnosis, risk stratification, and the role of pulmonary embolism response team.Intervent Radiol. 2018;35:116–21.

9.A, Weinberg I, Giri J, Jaff M, Weinberg M.role of the pulmonary embolism response team: how to build one, who to include, scenarios, organization, and algorithms.Vasc Interv Radiol. 2017;20:216–23.

10.JS, Piazza G.midterm report card for pulmonary embolism response teams.Med. 2018;23:72–4.

11.MV, Montero Cabezas JM, Klok FA. embolism response teams: what is the added value for patients with acute pulmonary embolism? Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2017;161:D1570.

12. C. multidisciplinary collaboration for the creation of a pulmonary embolism response team: creating a “Team of Rivals.” Intervent Radiol. 2017;34:16–24

13.MC, Jaber WA, Ross CB. embolism response teams. Med Assoc Ga. 2016; (suppl):10.

14.GJ. embolism in 2017: how we got here and where are we going? Vasc Interv Radiol. 2017;20:128–34.

15.PP, Rosenfield K, Rosovsky RP. pulmonary embolism response teams and systems.Diagn Ther. 2016;6:662–7

16.E, Erol S, Aliyev A, Cakici M, Baran C, Bermede O. surgical pulmonary embolectomy be performed with acceptable outcomes without a pulmonary embolism response team?Thorac Surg. 2017;104:1432.

17.N, Dudzinski DM.embolism response teams. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2015;17:387.

18.Chiaradia DA, Cuttica MJ, Jimenez D. role of the pulmonologist in a pulmonary embolism response team (PERT): a time to come on stage.Bronconeumol. 2019;55:1–2.

19.-Lopez J, Channick R. pulmonary embolism response team: what is the ideal model?Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;38:51–5.

20.CW, Dudzinski DM, Zakhary B, Friedman OA, Sista AK, Horowitz JM. approach to the management of pulmonary embolism patients: the pulmonary embolism response team (PERT).Multidiscip Healthc.

2018;11:187–95.

21.M, Haddadin IS, Heresi GA, Hornacek DA, Shishehbor MH, Bartholomew JR.Pulmonary embolism response teams.Thromb Thrombolysis. 2017;44:19–29.

22.TM, Giri J, Barnes GD, Rosovsky RP, Chang Y, Jaff MR, etal. of submassive and massive pulmonary embolism: a clinical practice survey from the second annual meeting of the Pulmonary Embolism Response Team Consortium.Thromb Thrombolysis. 2018;46:39–49.

23AS. Acute and chronic pulmonary embolism: the role of the pulmonary embolism response team.Opin Cardiol. 2017;32:672–8.

24.AS, Harshbarger S, Kabrhel C. Embolism Response Teams.Thromb Hemost. 2016;42:857–64.

25.EK, Young MN, Rosenfield K, Kabrhel C.pulmonary embolism response team: initial experiences and future directions.Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2017;15:481–9.

26.A, Silvas K, Alhassan S, Patel K, Singh AC, Malik K.thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism response teams: an overview.Care Nurs Q. 2017;40:237–50.

27.WA, Fong PP, Weisz G, Lattouf O, Jenkins J, Rosenfield K, etal.pulmonary embolism: with an emphasis on an interventional approach.Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:991–1002

28.-Aguilar M, Anaya-Ayala JE, Heresi GA, Rivera-Lebron BN.embolism response teams: a novel approach for the care of complex patients with pulmonary embolism.Appl Thromb Hemost. 2018;24:48S–55S.

29.PM, Criner GJ.pulmonary embolism.J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198:588–98.

30.TC, Sharma A, Wilkins L.embolism response teams: overview and impact of a multidisciplinary treatment algorithm.Radiol Nurs. 2017;36:206–10.

 

Volume 2 Issue 3 March 2021

©All rights reserved by Dr. Naved Y Hasan.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4