Background: The primary role of a pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) is to support decision-making processes regarding acute pulmonary embolism (PE) patients and provide advanced rescue therapies when needed. Despite a great need for its availability among physicians, PERT’s usefulness is yet to be proven. Objectives: Our goal was to establish whether patients benefit from qualification by PERT for admission to a tertiary cardiology ward. Methods: Data of all patients hospitalized due to PE for 12 months (July 2023–June 2024) were retrospectively analyzed. We aimed to compare patients admitted primarily via the emergency department with those consulted by PERT and eventually transferred from other hospitals. The primary outcome was the use of advanced therapies. Results: We identified 167 patients (50.3% women) hospitalized with PE. Out of them, 102 (61.1%) came from the emergency department, while 65 (38.9%) patients were transferred after PERT consultation. The transferred patients generally had more severe conditions, as indicated by the ESC death risk group classification (intermediate-high and high risk, OR 19.2, 95% CI 8.3–44.2). They were more often qualified for at least one of the advanced therapies than the emergency department patients (OR 23.2, 95% CI 9.3–58.1). We found no significant differences in in-hospital mortality (6.9% versus 1.5%, OR 4.7, 95% CI 0.6–39.3). Conclusions: Establishing PERT as a reference unit providing advanced treatment resulted in successfully delivering more complex treatment to severely ill PE patients. Despite their unfavorable basic characteristics, neither length of hospitalization nor in-hospital mortality seem to differ when compared to unselected, less compromised cases.