TdC 326: Guideline de Tromboembolismo Pulmonar (TEP) AHA/ACC 2026

·46 min·4 clips

The new pulmonary embolism guideline has rearranged everything, forcing doctors to relearn where each diagnostic tool now fits.

1. Ta de Clinicagem hosts Pedro Magno, Aline Campos, and João Pedro Noronha review the 2026 AHA/ACC pulmonary embolism guideline, the first major US guidance since the 2019 European document. 2. João Pedro Noronha, a recent internal medicine resident from Unifesp and former student of Aline, contributes as the guideline expert for this episode. 3. The episode's core thesis is to map the new ABCDE risk classification framework, identify what changed from 2019, and highlight where the new guideline introduces controversy. 4. Fewer than 10% of clinical PE suspicions are actually confirmed by CT angiography, making validated pre-test probability tools essential — reliance on clinical intuition leads to significantly more unnecessary imaging per comparative studies. 5. A 2011 ACC cohort of nearly 2,000 patients found dyspnea at rest in approximately 50% of confirmed PE cases and pleuritic chest pain in 39%, with both symptoms non-specific across many cardiopulmonary conditions. 6. The PERC rule (8 criteria) can exclude PE in low-probability patients without D-dimer, but has key limitations: not validated in pregnant women and not reliable in populations with high PE prevalence such as recent cesarean delivery or active malignancy. 7. The YEARS criteria (3 items: PE is most likely diagnosis, hemoptysis present, DVT signs present) allow individualized D-dimer thresholds — patients with D-dimer between 500 and 1,000 and no YEARS criteria can avoid CT, reducing CT ordering by approximately 14% without diagnostic loss. 8. The new AHA 2026 guideline replaces the prior low/intermediate/high risk schema with five groups — A (incidental/asymptomatic), B (symptomatic, low PESI), C (elevated PESI requiring RV evaluation), D (incipient cardiopulmonary failure, normotensive shock), and E (overt hemodynamic failure or arrest). 9. Groups B and C are further subdivided: B1 for subsegmental PE and B2 for segmental or more proximal PE; C1, C2, and C3 by degree of RV involvement and biomarker elevation — though the hosts note this subclassification rarely changes management. 10. The hosts highlight the guideline's increased emphasis on subsegmental PE, which was only mentioned in supplementary material in the 2019 European guideline but is now gaining recognition as a distinct entity due to improved imaging resolution. 11. Group D is a genuinely new risk tier — patients with normotensive shock signs such as delayed capillary refill, altered consciousness, reduced urine output, hyperlactatemia, or acute renal dysfunction, but maintaining adequate blood pressure. 12. A critical editorial observation: the guideline contains an apparent table error in group D, listing 'low blood pressure' as a criterion for normotensive shock — the hosts call this an oversight that should have been caught during review. 13. The guideline provides a class 2B recommendation for systemic thrombolysis in group D after multidisciplinary team evaluation — the first time thrombolysis has been explicitly permitted in a normotensive PE subgroup. 14. The PEITHO trial (thrombolysis vs. anticoagulation in intermediate-risk PE) found that hemodynamic deterioration or the need for rescue thrombolysis occurred at a mean of 1.5–1.79 days, establishing the 24–72-hour intensive monitoring window. 15. João Pedro frames the 24-72-hour window clinically: after this period in a stable patient, anticoagulation is likely working and discharge or de-escalation of monitoring becomes safer. 16. A key critique of the new guideline: it does not require RV assessment (echocardiography or CT ratio) for groups A and B, whereas a meta-analysis cited by Aline showed 34% of PESI low-risk patients had RV dysfunction with worse outcomes — motivating the 2019 European guideline's mandatory RV assessment. 17. The guideline affirms echocardiography as the preferred method for RV evaluation over CT ratio, citing superior specificity for RV dysfunction — though CT ratio remains informative when echo is unavailable. 18. The episode maintains a conversational, critical tone with the hosts openly disagreeing with specific guideline recommendations and contextualizing the evidence behind them. 19. Physicians, residents, and medical students managing thromboembolic disease will find the most value in this structured comparison of the 2026 and 2019 PE guidelines. 20. Listeners without clinical medicine background or those seeking a patient-facing overview of PE will find the episode too technical and guideline-dense.

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from Ta de Clinicagem