Comparison of Treatment Approaches and Subsequent Outcomes within a Pulmonary Embolism Response Team Registry
Table 6
Comparison of secondary outcomes by treatment approach.
Treatment approach
Secondary outcome 1: clinical deterioration
Overall (N = 1832)
Difference t-test or chi-square, value
No clinical deterioration (N = 1614)
Clinical deterioration (N = 218)
Anticoagulation monotherapy
1342 (83.1%)
98 (45.0%)
1440 (78.6%)
<0.001
Delayed advanced PE intervention
95 (5.9%)
18 (8.3%)
113 (6.2%)
Immediate advanced PE intervention
177 (11.0%)
102 (46.8%)
279 (15.2%)
Treatment approach
Secondary outcome 2: major bleeding
Overall (N = 1832)
Difference t-test or chi-square, value
No bleeding (N = 1702)
Major bleeding (N = 130)
Anticoagulation monotherapy
1379 (81.0%)
61 (46.9%)
1440 (78.6%)
<0.001
Delayed advanced PE intervention
99 (5.8%)
14 (10.8%)
113 (6.2%)
Immediate advanced PE intervention
224 (13.2%)
55 (42.3%)
279 (15.2%)
Breakout: advanced PE intervention (regardless of timing) by type†
Secondary outcome 2: major bleeding
Overall (N = 1832)
Difference t-test or chi-square, value
No bleeding (N = 1702)
Major bleeding (N = 130)
Systemic thrombolysis
121 (7.1%)
33 (25.4%)
154 (8.4%)
<0.001
Catheter-directed treatment
127 (7.5%)
20 (15.4%)
147 (8.0%)
0.00366
Surgical embolectomy
2 (0.1%)
7 (5.4%)
9 (0.5%)
<0.001
ECMO
0 (0%)
10 (7.7%)
10 (0.5%)
<0.001
Other types of advanced intervention
3 (0.2%)
1 (0.8%)
4 (0.2%)
0.255
The percentages within each cell were calculated using the N in the column header for that cell. †Some patients had more than one type of advanced PE intervention.
