Respiratory modifier
More than 6 L/min nasal cannula or nonrebreather mask
R
Respiratory modifier
Hypoxemic respiratory failure or ventilatory failure
PESI and HESTIA
PESI remains useful for estimating clinical severity in symptomatic PE. A low clinical severity score (PESI < 85) helps identify Category B patients, while elevated clinical severity (PESI >85) helps identify Category C patients. Hemodynamic compromise takes priority over PESI and moves the patient into Category D or E.
HESTIA is 11-step questionnaire to determine eligibility for outpatient management of Category A and B patients. If you answer "yes" to any of the 11-questions you should consider inpatient admission.
Treatment
Category A and B patients may be appropriate for outpatient treatment or early discharge when there are no other reasons for hospitalization.
Category C patients generally require hospitalization and therapeutic anticoagulation. Routine reperfusion therapy is not recommended in clinically stable patients.
Category D patients require close monitoring and early multidisciplinary PE evaluation. Advanced PE therapy may be considered depending on the clinical trajectory.
Category E patients require urgent critical care management and evaluation for reperfusion therapy such as systemic thrombolysis, catheter based therapy, mechanical thrombectomy, or surgical embolectomy.
For oral anticoagulation, DOACs are preferred over vitamin K antagonists when appropriate. When initial parenteral anticoagulation is needed, LMWH is preferred over unfractionated heparin in most patients.
The new classification provides a more practical continuum from low severity PE through cardiopulmonary failure and is designed to guide monitoring intensity, disposition, anticoagulation, and escalation to advanced PE therapy.
Initial Assessment & Management by Acute PE Clinical Category
Hover over a category to highlight its recommended assessment and management
Showing recommendations for
Initiate DOAC
I
Initiate LMWH
I
Initiate LMWH or UFH
I
Use PESI to assess short-term risk
I
Measure at least 1 cardiac biomarker
I
Measure lactate
I
Evaluate RV size and function with CT and/or echocardiography
I
Use HESTIA score to identify suitability for outpatient treatment
IIa
Use PESI score to identify the higher-risk patient
IIa
Evaluate for normotensive shock
IIa
Multidisciplinary PERT assessment to guide clinical management
I
Vasopressor and/or inotropic therapy
I
Systemic thrombolysis if acceptable bleeding risk, catheter-directed thrombolysis, or mechanical thrombectomy in appropriate cases
IIb
Systemic thrombolysis if acceptable bleeding risk, catheter-directed thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy, or surgical embolectomy
IIa
Systemic thrombolysis if acceptable bleeding risk
IIa
Consider VA-ECMO
IIa
Class I
Recommended
Class IIa
Reasonable
Class IIb
May be considered
Mechanical Thrombectomy vs Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis
PEERLESS trial: Mechanical thrombectomy and catheter-directed thrombolysis had similar short-term mortality.
Mechanical thrombectomy showed a favorable signal for some clinical outcomes, although it did not demonstrate a clear mortality benefit.
Anticoagulation
If parenteral anticoagulation is required, LMWH is preferred over UFH because of lower recurrent VTE and bleeding risk.
DOACs are preferred over warfarin for most patients eligible for oral anticoagulation.
Special Populations
Antiphospholipid syndrome: Warfarin is preferred.
CKD stage 2–3: DOAC therapy is generally preferred when otherwise appropriate.
Pregnancy: LMWH is preferred. UFH is an alternative when indicated.
Vasopressors and Other Meds
Norepinephrine is the preferred initial vasopressor.
At higher norepinephrine requirements, increasing catecholamine doses may increase pulmonary vascular resistance (>15mcg/min)
Consider adding a second vasopressor such as vasopressin rather than continuing to escalate norepinephrine alone.
Pulmonary Vasodilators
Class IIb: In selected patients with Category C2 through E, pulmonary vasodilator therapy may be considered.
Advanced Therapy for Acute Pulmonary Embolism by Risk Category
PE Category
Systemic Thrombolysis
Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis
Mechanical Thrombectomy
Surgical Embolectomy
A–C1
Class III: HarmLevel of Evidence A
Class III: No BenefitLevel of Evidence C, Expert Opinion
Class III: No BenefitLevel of Evidence C, Expert Opinion
Class III: No BenefitLevel of Evidence C, Expert Opinion
C2
Class III: HarmLevel of Evidence B, Randomized
Class IIb: Benefit UncertainLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Class IIb: Benefit UncertainLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Class III: No BenefitLevel of Evidence C, Expert Opinion
C3
Class IIb: Benefit UncertainLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Class IIb: Benefit UncertainLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Class IIb: Benefit UncertainLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Class III: No BenefitLevel of Evidence C, Expert Opinion
D1–D2
Class IIb: May Be ConsideredLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Class IIb: May Be ConsideredLevel of Evidence B, Nonrandomized
Class IIb: May Be ConsideredLevel of Evidence B, Nonrandomized
Class IIb: Benefit UncertainLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
E1
Class IIa: ReasonableLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Class IIb: May Be ConsideredLevel of Evidence B, Nonrandomized
Class IIb: May Be ConsideredLevel of Evidence B, Nonrandomized
Class IIb: May Be ConsideredLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
E2
Class IIa: ReasonableLevel of Evidence C, Limited Data
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Class III: No BenefitLevel of Evidence B, Nonrandomized
Clot-in-Transit
Class IIa: Advanced Therapies Are Reasonable
Class IIa
Reasonable
Class IIb
May be considered / benefit uncertain
Class III
No benefit or harm
CTEPD, Not Just CTEPH
Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary disease (CTEPD) represents a broader spectrum than CTEPH.
CTEPD can cause persistent symptoms and functional limitation with or without pulmonary hypertension.
CTEPH is the subset of CTEPD associated with pulmonary hypertension.
Class I: Patients with persistent dyspnea, exercise intolerance, or other PE-related symptoms >3 months after acute PE should be evaluated for CTEPD.
Evaluation may include:
TTE
V/Q scan
CPET
Additional pulmonary vascular evaluation when indicated
After a first PE without a major reversible provoking factor, extending anticoagulation beyond the initial 3–6 months is recommended when bleeding risk is acceptable.
Persistent Risk Factor
Extended anticoagulation is recommended when a persistent risk factor remains.
Major Reversible Risk Factor
If the PE occurred in the setting of a major reversible provoking factor, anticoagulation can generally be stopped after the initial 3–6 month treatment phase.
References
1
Creager MA, Barnes GD, Giri J, et al.
2026 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ACEP/CHEST/SCAI/SHM/SIR/SVM/SVN
guideline for the evaluation and management of acute pulmonary
embolism in adults.
Circulation. 2026;153.
doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001415.
View guideline
Primary Guideline
2
Naidu SS, Baran DA, Jentzer JC, et al.
SCAI SHOCK stage classification expert consensus update:
a review and incorporation of validation studies.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(9):933-946.
doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2022.01.018.
View SCAI consensus
SCAI Shock Staging
3
Jaber WA, Gonsalves CF, Stortecky S, et al.
Large-bore mechanical thrombectomy versus catheter-directed
thrombolysis in the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary
embolism: primary results of the PEERLESS randomized controlled
trial.
Circulation. 2025;151(5):260-273.
doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.072364.
View PEERLESS trial
PEERLESS
4
Meyer G, Vicaut E, Danays T, et al.
Fibrinolysis for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary
embolism.
N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1402-1411.
doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1302097.
View PEITHO trial
Systemic Thrombolysis
5
Rosenfield K, et al.
Ultrasound-facilitated, catheter-directed fibrinolysis for
acute pulmonary embolism.
N Engl J Med. 2026.
doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2516567.
View HI-PEITHO trial
Catheter-Directed Therapy
6
Jiménez D, Aujesky D, Moores L, et al.
Simplification of the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index for
prognostication in patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary
embolism.
Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(15):1383-1389.
View study