Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to a hypercoagulable state. The prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) seems to be higher in this subgroup of patients. Patients and methods: We combined data from two tertiary referral centers specialized in the management of PE. The aims of this study were as follows: (1) to evaluate the prevalence of PE among a large population of consecutive patients admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia in two centers, (2) to identify a plasma D-dimer threshold that may be useful in PE diagnostic assessment, (3) to characterize the abnormalities associated with PE and mortality in COVID-19 patients. Results: The incidence of symptomatic acute PE was 19.3%. For diagnosing PE in COVID-19 patients, based on ROC curve analysis, we identified a D-dimer concentration/patient’s age ratio of 70, which improved D-dimer diagnostic capacity for PE and led to a reclassification improvement of 14% (NRI 0.14, p = 0.03) when compared to a cut-off level of 1000 ng/mL. Especially in severe COVID-19 lung involvement, D-dimer/age ratio cut-off equal to 70 was characterized by high diagnostic feasibility (sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value of 83%, 94%, 96%, and 73%, respectively). Apart from PE status, lung involvement and troponin T concentration were also independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. In the subgroup of PE patients, mortality was comparable with non-PE patients (19/88 (21.5%) vs. 101/368 (27.4%) for non-PE, p = 0.26) and was associated with older age, higher Bova scores, and higher troponin T concentrations. Age was the sole independent predictor for mortality in this subgroup. Conclusions: PE in COVID-19 patients is common, but it may not influence mortality when managed at a specialized center. In suspected PE, age-adjusted D-dimer levels (upper limit of normal obtained from the formula patient’s age × 70) may still be a useful tool to start the diagnostic workup. In COVID-19 patients without PE, older age, more extensive parenchymal involvement, or higher D-dimer levels are factors predicting mortality.

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.