Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism

Evidence-based perioperative diagnosis and management of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review

Background

The diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary embolism have multi-modal approach based on specificity, sensitivity, availability of the machine, and associated risks of imaging modalities.

Aim

This review aimed to provide shreds of evidence that improve perioperative diagnosis and management of suspected pulmonary embolism.

Methods

The study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline 2020. After a clear criteria has been established an electronic searching database was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane library, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), with Key search terms included:('pulmonary embolism' AND' anesthesia management ', 'anticoagulation' AND 'pulmonary embolism', 'thrombolysis 'AND 'pulmonary embolism', 'surgery' AND' pulmonary embolism'), were used to draw the evidence.The quality of literatures were categorized based on WHO 2011 level of evidence and degree of recommendation, in addition, the study is registered with research registry unique identifying number (UIN) of reviewregistry1318." and has high quality based on AMSTAR2 assessment criteria.

Results

A totally of 27 articles were included [guidelines (n = 3), Cochrane (=5), systemic reviews (n = 7), meta-analyses (=2), RCT (n = 4), cohort studies (n = 3), and cross-sectional study (n = 3) and illegible articles identified from searches of the electronic databases were imported into the ENDNOTE software version X7.1 and duplicates were removed.

Discussion

Currently divergent and contradictory approaches are implemented in diagnosis and management for patients suspected of pulmonary embolism.

Conclusion

All perioperative patients, especially trauma victims, prostate or orthopedic surgery, malignancy, immobility, and obesity; smokers; and oral contraceptive users, antipsychotic medications are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism and need special caution during surgery and anesthesia.

Thrombolytics for venous thromboembolic events: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Thrombolytic therapy might reduce venous thromboembolism-related mortality and morbidity, but it could also increase the risk of major bleeding. We systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of thrombolytics in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or deep venous thrombosis (DVT). We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for relevant randomized controlled trials up to February 2019. Multiple investigators independently screened and collected data. We included 45 studies (4740 participants). Pooled estimates of PE studies indicate probable reduction in mortality with thrombolysis (risk ratio [RR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.94) (moderate certainty) and possible reduction in nonfatal PE recurrence (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35-0.89) (low certainty). Pooled estimates of DVT studies indicate the possible absence of effects on mortality (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.26-2.28) (low certainty) and recurrent DVT (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.56-1.76) (low certainty), but possible reduction in postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) with thrombolytics (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.83) (low certainty). Pooled estimates of the complete body of evidence indicate increases in major bleeding (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.46-2.46) (high certainty) and a probable increase in intracranial bleeding (RR, 3.17; 95% CI 1.19-8.41) (moderate certainty) with thrombolytics. Our findings indicate that thrombolytics probably reduce mortality in patients with submassive- or intermediate-risk PE and may reduce PTS in patients with proximal DVT at the expense of a significant increase in major bleeding. Because the balance between benefits and harms is profoundly influenced by the baseline risks of critical outcomes, stakeholders involved in decision making would need to weigh these effects to define which clinical scenarios merit the use of thrombolytics.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for people with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the fourth update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 17 August 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for people with acute PE (massive/submassive). We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (ZZ, QH) assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI. The primary outcomes of interest were death, recurrence of PE and haemorrhagic events. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three new studies for inclusion in this update. We included 21 trials in the review, with a total of 2401 participants. No studies compared thrombolytics versus surgical intervention. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no extractable data. Most studies carried a high or unclear risk of bias related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared to control (heparin alone or heparin plus placebo), thrombolytics plus heparin probably reduce both the odds of death (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.88; 19 studies, 2319 participants; low-certainty evidence), and recurrence of PE (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.91; 12 studies, 2050 participants; low-certainty evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when six studies at high risk of bias were excluded from analysis (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13; 13 studies, 2046 participants) and in the analysis of submassive PE participants (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02; 1993 participants). Effects on recurrence of PE also weakened after removing one study at high risk of bias for sensitivity analysis (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.04; 11 studies, 1949 participants). We downgraded the certainty of evidence to low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns. Major haemorrhagic events were probably more common in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.92 to 4.20; 15 studies, 2101 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), as were minor haemorrhagic events (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.66 to 5.30; 13 studies,1757 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate or low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns and inconsistency. Haemorrhagic stroke may occur more often in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 7.59, 95% CI 1.38 to 41.72; 2 studies, 1091 participants). Limited data indicated that thrombolytics may benefit haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, composite clinical outcomes, need for escalation and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when interpreting results. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (mean difference (MD) -1.40 days, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.11; 5 studies, 368 participants). Haemodynamic decompensation may occur less in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.66; 3 studies, 1157 participants). Quality of life was similar between the two treatment groups. None of the included studies provided data on post-thrombotic syndrome or on cost comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests that thrombolytics may reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin (the effectiveness was mainly driven by one trial with massive PE). Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause more major and minor haemorrhagic events, including haemorrhagic stroke. More studies of high methodological quality are needed to assess safety and cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy for people with pulmonary embolism.

Long-term results of low-dose tissue plasminogen activator therapy in acute pulmonary embolism

Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) is the most commonly used thrombolytic agent in patients with high risk and intermediate to high mortality risk acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Clinical trials have shown early efficacy and safety of low-dose rt-PA. This study investigated the effects of low-dose rt-PA treatment on acute PE in long-term prognosis, recurrence of pulmonary thromboembolism, or the development of late complications. In this study, 48 patients undergoing low-dose rt-PA for the relative contraindications of thrombolytic therapy and 48 patients undergoing standard-dose therapy were evaluated retrospectively. Long-term follow-up investigated the chronic PE, recurrence, and causes of morbidity and mortality.

In both treatment groups, embolism-induced mortality and overall mortality rates were similar in the first 30 days (p=1.000, p=0.714, respectively). Overall mortality rates in long-term follow-up were 41.7% in the low-dose treatment group and 16.7% in the standard-dose treatment group (p=0.013). The mortality rate at the first year was higher in the low-dose-treated group (p=0.011) and most of the deaths were due to accompanying comorbidities. There was no difference in PE recurrence and duration of recurrence between the groups (p=0.598, p=0.073, respectively). Intracranial hemorrhage due to therapy developed in one patient in both groups.

Low-dose thrombolytic therapy in acute PE reduces PE-related mortality in the early period. Long-term follow-up showed that thrombolytic therapy did not affect mortality rates independently of the dose and PE recurrence.

Lifting the fog in intermediate-risk (submassive) PE: full dose, low dose, or no thrombolysis?

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a disease frequently encountered in clinical practice. While the management of haemodynamically stable, low risk patients with acute PE is well established, managing intermediate disease often presents a therapeutic dilemma. In this review, we discuss the various therapeutic options available in this patient group. This includes thrombolysis, surgical embolectomy and catheter directed techniques. We have also explored the role of specialist PE response teams in the management of such patients. ​.

Repeated Thrombolytic Treatment for Recurrent Pulmonary Thromboembolism: A Report of 2 Cases and a Literature Review

We present 2 cases of pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE). The first case, a 50-year-old man, was admitted to the emergency department because of sudden onset dyspnea and left side chest pain. He was diagnosed with intermediate-risk (submassive) PTE, and thrombolytic treatment was commenced. The patient fully recovered, but 5 days later, he was diagnosed with a new, high-risk PTE. The second patient, a 23-year-old woman, presented with syncope, dyspnea, and chest pain for 2 days. She was diagnosed with high-risk (massive) PTE. Thrombolytic treatment was commenced, and the patient fully recovered, too. But the later patient was also diagnosed with a new PTE 4 days later. We applied repeated thrombolytic treatment in the patients due to repeated PTE. The first patient fully recovered and was discharged from the hospital, but the second patient died because of gastrointestinal bleeding and renal insufficiency. A repeated thrombolytic treatment could be an alternative treatment for these patients, considering treatment's risks.

[Comparative efficacy of various thrombolytic agents in treatment of pulmonary embolism]

The authors carried out a retrospective analysis of clinical efficacy of streptokinase and alteplase (actilyse®) in patients presenting with high- and intermediate-to-high risk pulmonary artery thromboembolism (PATE) who were discharged from hospital after appropriate treatment performed. Of the total number of the treated patients, we formed 2 groups comprising 20 patients each, receiving alteplase (group 1) and streptokinase (group 2). The patients were comparable by the main clinical characteristics, predisposing factors, severity of pulmonary artery thromboembolism (PATE) and duration of treatment. Efficacy of thrombolytic therapy assessed clinically and instrumentally did not differ. However, by the stratified risk and frequency of PATE relapses, the condition of patients receiving alteplase turned out to be more severe. Based on the obtained results, a conclusion was made that actilyse is a drug of choice for treatment of patients with PATE.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for patients with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the third update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 16 April 2018. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for patients with acute PE. We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (JY, QH) assessed the eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies for inclusion in this 2018 update. We included in the review 18 trials with a total of 2197 participants. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no data that we could extract. Most of the studies carried a high risk of bias because of high or unclear risk related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with heparin alone, or heparin plus placebo, thrombolytics plus heparin can reduce the odds of death (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.87, 2167 participants, P = 0.01, low-quality evidence) and recurrence of PE (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.89, 1898 participants, P = 0.02, low-quality evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when we excluded from analysis four studies at high risk of bias (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.06, 2054 participants, P = 0.08). The incidence of major and minor haemorrhagic events was higher in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.95 to 4.31, 1897 participants, P < 0.001, low-quality evidence; OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.58 to 6.06, 1553 participants, P = 0.001, very low-quality evidence, respectively). We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low or very low because of design limitations, potential influence of pharmaceutical companies, and small sample sizes. Length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -0.89, 95% CI -3.13 to 1.34) and quality of life were similar between the two treatment groups. Limited information from a small number of trials indicated that thrombolytics may improve haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, clinical outcomes, and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when results are interpreted. Similarily, fewer participants from the thrombolytics group required escalation of treatment. None of the included studies reported on post-thrombotic syndrome or compared the costs of different treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence suggests that thrombolytics reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin. The included studies used a variety of thrombolytic drugs. Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause major and minor haemorrhagic events and stroke. More high-quality, blinded randomised controlled trials assessing safety and cost-effectiveness of therapies for pulmonary embolism are required.

Percutaneous Venous Interventions in The Pulmonary Vascular, Central and Peripheral Venous Systems: How to Recognize, Avoid and Treat Complications

Endovascular treatment of venous disease encompasses a broad range of interventions. Both central and peripheral venous interventions can range from the simple to the complex which increases the need for proper patient selection, procedural planning and technical proficiency. The following article will discuss the importance of avoiding, recognizing and addressing complications associated with venous interventions. Our goal is to raise awareness and educate to help the reader improve performance.

Update on Perioperative Pulmonary Embolism Management: A Decision Support Tool to Aid in Diagnosis and Treatment

Pulmonary embolism (PE) affects up to 1 in every 1000 people per year, one-third of whom do not survive. Moreover, perioperative presentation of PE is 5 times more likely than at other times and poses a unique set of challenges for both diagnosis and treatment. This article discusses several important aspects regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and management of perioperative PE, incorporating information from the most recent practice guidelines, emerging literature on medical therapy, and interventional therapies. It proposes a clinical decision support tool that organizes the salient aspects of perioperative PE management to serve as an aid in practice.

Prise en charge de l'embolie pulmonaire grave en réanimation

L'embolie pulmonaire (EP) grave, définie par la présence d’un état de choc, est à l'origine d'une mortalité importante. L'objectif de cette mise au point est de synthétiser les dernières avancées et recommandations concernant la prise en charge des formes graves d'EP. La stratification du risque individuel de mortalité précoce permet d'apporter une stratégie diagnostique et thérapeutique optimisée pour chaque patient. Le traitement symptomatique consiste essentiellement en la prise en charge de l'état de choc. L'anticoagulation curative par héparine non fractionnée est réservée aux patients hémodynamiquement instables. Chez ces patients à haut risque, la thrombolyse systémique diminue la mortalité et le risque de récidive d'EP. Chez les patients à risque intermédiaire élevé, la thrombolyse systémique à dose standard diminue le risque de choc secondaire mais sans impact sur la mortalité globale. La thrombolyse est donc réservée aux patients à risque intermédiaire élevé présentant secondairement un état de choc. L'embolectomie chirurgicale reste indiquée en cas de contre-indication absolue à la thrombolyse ou en cas d'échec de celle-ci. Le positionnement dans l'algorithme thérapeutique de l'assistance extracorporelle et des techniques percutanées de revascularisation reste à définir. Leurs indications doivent donc être discutées dans des centres experts après une concertation multidisciplinaire incluant pneumologues, cardiologues, réanimateurs, radiologues interventionnels et chirurgiens cardiaques.

Central Venous Catheter-directed Tissue Plasminogen Activator in Massive Pulmonary Embolism

We present the case of an 88-year-old female who presented to the emergency department (ED) with suspected massive pulmonary embolism (PE) causing respiratory failure, right heart strain, and shock, who despite early and aggressive resuscitation with vasopressors and continuous peripheral infusion of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), suffered a cardiac arrest in the ED. We describe the approach of a tPA bolus directed through a central venous catheter, resulting in return of spontaneous circulation and immediate improvement in physiologic parameters prior to confirmation of PE with computed tomography angiogram. We further hypothesize that in patients deemed too unstable to be transferred for embolectomy or catheter-directed thrombolysis, central venous catheter-directed bolus tPA may be more effective than peripheral infusion alone.

Can thrombus age guide thrombolytic therapy?

Venous thrombosis (VT) is a common yet complex clinical condition that has shown minimal alteration in clinical management for decades. It is well known that thrombus evolves structurally over time, with complex changes resulting from the interplay between coagulation factors, cytokines, leukocytes and a myriad of other factors. Our current treatment options are most effective in the acute thrombus, which is composed predominantly of a loose mesh of fibrin and red blood cells (RBCs), making current anticoagulation therapies and thrombolytics quite effective in treatment. Later stages of thrombus are more cellular containing leukocytes, and develop a fibrotic collagenous framework that is more resistant to our current treatments. Understanding the biology of an evolving thrombus will allow us to tailor our treatment and optimize outcomes, as well as focus on novel therapies for the treatment of chronic thrombus. Given the morbidity and mortality of both post thrombotic syndrome (PTS) in patients with deep VT, as well as chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE), new and innovative therapies must continue to be explored to help prevent these potentially devastating conditions.

Initial anticoagulation in patients with pulmonary embolism: thrombolysis, unfractionated heparin, LMWH, fondaparinux, or DOACs?

The initial treatment of haemodynamically stable patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) has dramatically changed since the introduction of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs). With the recent discovery of the direct oral anticoagulant drugs (DOACs), initial treatment of PE will be simplified even further. In several large clinical trials it has been demonstrated that DOACs are not inferior to standard therapy for the initial treatment of PE, and because of their practicability they are becoming the agents of first choice. However, many relative contraindications to DOACs were exclusion criteria in the clinical trials. Therefore, LMWHs will continue to play an important role in initial PE treatment and in some cases there still is a role for unfractionated heparin (UFH). In this review we will give an overview of the biophysical, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of anticoagulants currently available for the initial management of PE. In addition, we will provide a comprehensive overview of the indications for the use of UFH, LMWHs and DOACs in the initial management of PE from a pharmacokinetic/-dynamic point of view.

Pulmonary Embolism in 2017: How We Got Here and Where Are We Going?

In the 1970s, both the Urokinase Pulmonary Embolism and Urokinase-Streptokinase Pulmonary Embolism trials began the quest to develop thrombolytic therapy for the treatment of acute massive and submassive pulmonary embolism (PE). The goals of these studies were the immediate reduction in clot burden, restoration of hemodynamic stability, and improved survival. Major bleeding became the major barrier for clinicians to employ these therapies. From 1980s to the present time, a number of studies using recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator for achieving these same above outcomes were completed but major bleeding continued to remain an adoption barrier. Finally, the concept of bringing the thrombolytic agent into the clot has entered the quest for the Holy Grail in the treatment of PE. This article will review all the major trials using peripheral thrombolysis and provide insight into the need for a team approach to pulmonary care (Pulmonary Embolism Response Team), standardization of pulmonary classification, and the need for trials designed for both short- and long-term outcomes using thrombolysis for selected PE populations.

Novel Thrombolytic Drug Based on Thrombin Cleavable Microplasminogen Coupled to a Single-Chain Antibody Specific for Activated GPIIb/IIIa

Background

Thrombolytic therapy for acute thrombosis is limited by life‐threatening side effects such as major bleeding and neurotoxicity. New treatment options with enhanced fibrinolytic potential are therefore required. Here, we report the development of a new thrombolytic molecule that exploits key features of thrombosis. We designed a recombinant microplasminogen modified to be activated by the prothrombotic serine‐protease thrombin (HtPlg), fused to an activation‐specific anti–glycoprotein IIb/IIIa single‐chain antibody (SCE5), thereby hijacking the coagulation system to initiate thrombolysis.

Methods and Results

The resulting fusion protein named SCE5‐HtPlg shows in vitro targeting towards the highly abundant activated form of the fibrinogen receptor glycoprotein IIb/IIIa expressed on activated human platelets. Following thrombin formation, SCE5‐HtPlg is activated to contain active microplasmin. We evaluate the effectiveness of our targeted thrombolytic construct in two models of thromboembolic disease. Administration of SCE5‐HtPlg (4 μg/g body weight) resulted in effective thrombolysis 20 minutes after injection in a ferric chloride–induced model of mesenteric thrombosis (48±3% versus 92±5% for saline control, P<0.01) and also reduced emboli formation in a model of pulmonary embolism (P<0.01 versus saline). Furthermore, at these effective therapeutic doses, the SCE5‐HtPlg did not prolong bleeding time compared with saline (P=0.99).

Conclusions

Our novel fusion molecule is a potent and effective treatment for thrombosis that enables in vivo thrombolysis without bleeding time prolongation. The activation of this construct by thrombin generated within the clot itself rather than by a plasminogen activator, which needs to be delivered systemically, provides a novel targeted approach to improve thrombolysis.

Mortality Related Risk Factors in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism in the ICU

Introduction. We sought to identify possible risk factors associated with mortality in patients with high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) after intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Patients and Methods. PE patients, diagnosed with computer tomography pulmonary angiography, were included from two ICUs and were categorized into groups: group 1 high-risk patients and group 2 intermediate/low-risk patients. Results. Fifty-six patients were included. Of them, 41 (73.2%) were group 1 and 15 (26.7%) were group 2. When compared to group 2, need for vasopressor therapy (0 vs 68.3%; p < 0.001) and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (6.7 vs 36.6%; p = 0.043) were more frequent in group 1. The treatment of choice for group 1 was thrombolytic therapy in 29 (70.7%) and anticoagulation in 12 (29.3%) patients. ICU mortality for group 1 was 31.7% (n = 13). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, APACHE II score >18 (OR 42.47 95% CI 1.50–1201.1), invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 30.10 95% CI 1.96–463.31), and thrombolytic therapy (OR 0.03 95% CI 0.01–0.98) were found as independent predictors of mortality. Conclusion. In high-risk PE, admission APACHE II score and need for invasive mechanical ventilation may predict death in ICU. Thrombolytic therapy seems to be beneficial in these patients.