Table 2.
Anatomical sites of acute pulmonary embolism and percentages of imaging assessment performed to assess pulmonary thromboembolic events.NR not reported; NA: not applicable (retrospective studies); CTPA: Computed tomography pulmonary angiography; CUS: Compression ultrasonography. Follow-up was available only in prospective studies but one of this did not reported the length [21].
| Author | Imaging techniques | Thromboprophylaxis | DVT | Follow-up | Sites of intraluminal pulmonary arterial filling defects | Imaging test performed (CTPA) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main (%) | Lobar (%) | Segmental (%) | Subsegmental (%) | (%) | ||||||
| Lodigiani et al. [1] | CTPA Two point CUS in ICU Whole leg ultrasound in general wards |
Enoxaparin or Nadroparin NR for PE patients (only reported 100% of ICU patients) |
PE±DVT and isolated DVT reported separately | NA | NR | 30.0 | 10.0 | 33 | ||
| Poissy et al. [16] | CTPA | LWMH or UFH In 20/22 patients NR for PE patients |
3/22 (13.6) | NA | 10.0 * 40.0⁎⁎ |
55.0 | NR | 31.8 | ||
| Grillet et al. [17] | CTPA | NR | NR for PE patients | NA | 0 | 43.4 | 100 | 0 | 35.7 | |
| Leonard-Lorant [8] | CTPA | LMWH 25/32 (78%) |
NR for PE patients | NA | 21.8 | 34.3 | 28.1 | 15.6 | 63.0 | |
| Llijtos et al. [3] | CTPA (in 4 patients) TEE (in 2 patients) Limb ultrasound |
8 (31%) prophylactic anticoagulation 18 (69%) therapeutic anticoagulation NR for PE patients |
NR for PE patients | NA | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | |
| Klok et al. [18] | CTPA Limb Ultrasound |
Nadroparin in all patients with different regimens | NR for PE patients | NA | 70.7 | 29.2 | NR | |||
| Thomas et al. [19] | CTPA Limb Ultrasound |
Prophylactic dalteparin in all patients NR for PE patients |
NR for PE patients | NA | 20 | 0 | 60.0 | 20 | 17.4 | |
| Middeldorp et al. [20] | CTPA Limb ultrasound |
Thromboprophylaxis with nadroparin in 167 patients (84%) 19 patients (9.6%) continued therapeutic anticoagulation |
Defined as PE±DVT | 17 | 7.6 | 76.9 | 15.3 | NR | ||
| Helms et al. [4] | CTPA | LMWH or UFH Prophylactic dose 105 (70) Therapeutic dose 45 (60) |
NR for PE patients | 7 | 37.5 | 33.3 | 20.8 | 12.5 | NR | |
| Galeano-Valle et al. [21] | CTPA CUS |
Enoxaparin or Bemiparin In 19/24 patients |
4/11 (36.3) | NR | 13.3 | 46.6 | 86.6 | 46.6 | NR | |
| Bompard et al. [12] | CTPA | Enoxaparin in all patients at prophylactic dose | NR for PE patients | 26 | 31.2 | 65.2 | 12.5 | 53 ° | ||
| Soumagne et al. [22] | CTPA | NR | 35 (9.3) |
NR | NR | NR | NR | 14.6 | ||
| Freund et al. [23] | CTPA | NR | 101 (11) |
NR | NR | NR | NR | 15 | ||
| Chen et al. [24] | CTPA | NR | 1 (4) |
NR | 0 | 25 (100) | 25 (100) | 0 | 100 | |
| Longhcamp et al. [25] | CTPA | Intravenous heparin infusion or enoxaparin |
6 (24) |
0 | 3 (60) |
2 (40) |
0 | 28 | ||
| Whyte et al. [26] | CTPA | Enoxaparing or UFH |
7 (8.7) |
NR | 3 (3.7) |
NR | 28 (35) |
13 (16.2) |
14.4 | |
| Marone et al. [27] | CTPA CUS |
LMWH | 8 (33.3) |
10 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | |
| Fauvel et al. [28] | CTPA | LMWH 738 (63.0) |
18 (1.5) |
NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | 43.0 | |
| Van den Heuvel [29] | CTPA | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | 92 | |
| Mestre-Gomez et al. [30] | CTPA | LMWH 23 (79.3) |
2 (6.9) |
NR | 9 (31) |
20 (69) |
NR | |||
| van Dam et al. [31] | CTPA | (100) Not specified the drug |
0 | NR | 4 (17) |
16 (70) |
3 (13) |
NR | ||
| Gervaise et al. [32] | CTPA | NR | NR | NR | 2 (15) |
4 (30) |
7 (55) |
0 | 49.3 | |
| Trimaille et al. [33] | CTPA | Enoxaparin | 12 (24.5) |
NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | 34.6 | |
⁎
Defined as proximal;.
⁎⁎
Defined as bilateral. °Performed due to clinical deterioration.