• Mary P Dang, Anna Cheng, Jessica Garcia, Ying Lee, Mihir Parikh, Ali B V McMichael, Brian L Han, Sheena Pimpalwar, Elliot S Rinzler, Olivia L Hoffman, Sirine A Baltagi, Cindy Bowens, Abhay A Divekar, Paige Davis Volk, Craig J Huang, Surendranath R Veeram Reddy, Yousef Arar, and Ayesha Zia.
• University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, TX; Department of Pediatric; Division of Hematology/Oncology; Children's Health System of Texas, TX.
• Chest. 2024 Oct 3.

BackgroundMultidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) streamline care of adults with life-threatening pulmonary embolism (PE). Given rarity of pediatric PE, developing a clinical, educational, and research PERT paradigm is a novel and underused concept in pediatrics.Research QuestionIs a PERT feasible in pediatrics, and does it improve PE care?Study Design And MethodsA strategy-to-execution proposal to launch a pediatric PERT was developed for institutional buy-in. Key stakeholders collectively implemented the PERT. Data were collected for the 2-year pre-PERT and post-PERT eras, and outcomes were compared.ResultsPERT implementation took 12 months. Our PERT, led by hematology, is composed of pediatric experts in emergency medicine, critical care, interventional cardiology, anesthesiology, and interventional radiology. Data on 30 patients pre-PERT and 31 patients post-PERT were analyzed. Pre-PERT, 10% (3 of 30), 13% (4 of 30), 20% (6 of 30), and 57% (17 of 30), and post-PERT, 3% (1 of 31), 10% (3 of 31), 16% (5 of 31), and 71% (22 of 31) were categorized as high-risk, intermediate-low-risk, intermediate-high-risk, and low-risk PE, respectively. Post-PERT, there were 13 unique PERT activations. PERT was activated on all eligible patients with PE and, additionally, on 4 low-risk PEs. Time to echocardiogram was shorter post-PERT (4.7 vs 2 hours, P = .0147). Anticoagulation was ordered (90 vs 54 minutes, P = .003) and given sooner (154 vs 113 minutes, P = .049) post-PERT. There were no differences in time to reperfusion therapies (12 hours pre-PERT vs 8.7 hours post-PERT, P = .10). Five of 6 (83.3%) eligible (intermediate-high and high-risk) patients received reperfusion therapies in the post-PERT era compared to 3 of 8 (37.5%) eligible patients in the pre-PERT era (P = .0001). There were no differences in major bleeding, mortality, or length of stay in either era.InterpretationThe pediatric PERT paradigm was successfully created and adopted locally. Our PERT enhanced access to experts, facilitated timely advanced therapies, and held value for low-risk PE. The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and Children's Health System of Texas pediatric PERT may serve as a best practice model for streamlining care for pediatric PE.Copyright © 2024 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

10 keywords...

hide…