Venous thromboembolism is a common disease which remains underdiagnosed because of nonspecific presentations which can range from asymptomatic incidental imaging findings to sudden death. Symptoms can overlap with comorbid cardiopulmonary disease, and risk factors that offer clues to the clinician are not always present. The diagnostic approach can vary depending on the specific clinical presentation, but ruling in the diagnosis nearly always depends on lung imaging. Overuse of diagnostic testing is another recognized problem; a cautious, evidence-based approach is required, although physician gestalt must be acknowledged. The following review offers an approach to the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism based on the assessment of symptoms, signs, risk factors, laboratory findings, and imaging studies.
Background: Studies report hypercoagulability in coronavirus disease 2019 , leading many institutions to escalate anticoagulation intensity for thrombosis prophylaxis.Objective: To determine the bleeding risk with various intensities of anticoagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viral illnesses (ORVI).Patients/Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared the incidence of major bleeding in patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) within a single health system with COVID-19 versus ORVI. In the COVID-19 cohort, we assessed the effect of anticoagulation intensity received on ICU admission on bleeding risk. We performed a secondary analysis with anticoagulation intensity as a time-varying covariate to reflect dose changes after ICU admission.Results: Four hundred and forty-three and 387 patients were included in the COVID-19 and ORVI cohorts, respectively. The hazard ratio of major bleeding for the COVID-19 cohort relative to the ORVI cohort was 1.26 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86-1.86). In COVID-19 patients, an inverse-probability treatment weighted model found therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation on ICU admission had an adjusted hazard ratio of bleeding of 1.55 (95% CI: 0.88-2.73) compared with standard prophylacticintensity anticoagulation. However, when anticoagulation was assessed as a timevarying covariate and adjusted for other risk factors for bleeding, the adjusted hazard ratio for bleeding on therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation compared with standard thromboprophylaxis was 2.59 (95% CI: 1.20-5.57).
Conclusions:Critically ill patients with COVID-19 had a similar bleeding risk as ORVI patients. When accounting for changes in anticoagulation that occurred in COVID-19 patients, therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation was associated with a greater risk of major bleeding compared with standard thromboprophylaxis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.