Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug;17(8):e014088.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014088. Epub 2024 Jul 12.

Composite Pulmonary Embolism Shock Score and Risk of Adverse Outcomes in Patients With Pulmonary Embolism

Affiliations

Composite Pulmonary Embolism Shock Score and Risk of Adverse Outcomes in Patients With Pulmonary Embolism

Robert S Zhang et al. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

Background: In hemodynamically stable patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE), the Composite Pulmonary Embolism Shock (CPES) score predicts normotensive shock. However, it is unknown if CPES predicts adverse clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine whether the CPES score predicts in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic deterioration.

Methods: Patients with acute intermediate-risk PE admitted from October 2016 to July 2019 were included. CPES was calculated for each patient. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic decompensation. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome. The association of CPES with primary and secondary outcomes was evaluated.

Results: Among the 207 patients with intermediate-risk PE (64.7% with intermediate-high risk PE), 29 (14%) patients had a primary outcome event. In a multivariable model, a higher CPES score was associated with a worse primary composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.29-2.54]; P=0.001). Moreover, a higher CPES score predicted death (aHR, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.04-2.96]; P=0.033), resuscitated cardiac arrest (aHR, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.17-3.38]; P=0.011), and hemodynamic decompensation (aHR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.34-2.89]; P=0.001). A high CPES score (≥3) was associated with the worse primary outcome when compared with patients with a low CPES score (22% versus 2.4%; P=0.003; aHR, 6.48 [95% CI, 1.49-28.04]; P=0.012). CPES score provided incremental prognostic value for the prediction of primary outcome over baseline demographics and European Society of Cardiology intermediate-risk subcategories (global Χ2 value increased from 0.63 to 1.39 to 13.69; P=0.005).

Conclusions: In patients with acute intermediate-risk PE, the CPES score effectively risk stratifies and prognosticates patients for the prediction of clinical events and provides incremental value over baseline demographics and European Society of Cardiology intermediate-risk subcategories.

Keywords: hemodynamics; prognosis; pulmonary embolism; shock.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dr Bangalore participated in advisory board at Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Amgen, Pfizer, Merck, REATA, Inari, Truvic, Argon. The other authors report no conflicts.

Comment in

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources