Search

Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) and acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have similar clinical symptoms, making PE diagnosis challenging. Previous studies have shown that the prevalence of PE among COPD patients admitted with worsening respiratory symptoms was not negligible, but that systematic search for PE did not provide a clinical benefit. Predictive factors for PE remain unknown., Objective: to identify predictive factors for PE among COPD patients with worsening respiratory symptoms., Methods: We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis which included the patients from the prospective PEP cohort and those randomized to the intervention arm in the SLICE trial which included a systematic search for PE in COPD patients admitted for worsening respiratory symptoms. Univariable and multivariable analysis were used to assess factors associated with the diagnosis of PE during the initial management., Results: Among 1110 COPD patients, PE was diagnosed in 61 (5.49 %; 95 %CI 4.15 %-6.84 %). In univariable analysis, BNP (Brain natriuretic peptide) (odds ratio [OR] 1.02 per 100 ng/L increase, 95 %CI 1.01-1.04), prothrombin time (OR 0.78, 95 %CI 0.65-0.94), fibrinogen (OR 0.80, 95 %CI 0.64-0.98), atrial fibrillation (OR 4.74, 95 %CI 1.84-10.80), respiratory rate ≥30 min (OR 2.34, 95 %CI 1.13-4.6) and recent medical immobilization (OR 1.79, 95 %CI 0.99-3.13]) were associated with the risk of PE diagnosed during the initial management. In multivariable analysis, respiratory rate ≥30 (OR 2.77, 95 %CI 1.08-6.71) was a predictive factor for PE, as well as BNP (OR 1.02, 95 %CI 1.00-1.05) with an area under the curve =0.64, negative predictive value =0.15 (95 %CI 0.09-0.23), sensitivity =0.78 (95 %CI 0.74-0.82) and specificity =0.46 (95 %CI 0.29-0.63)., Conclusion: Among patients with COPD admitted for worsening respiratory symptoms, respiratory rate and BNP levels are predictor of PE, but with limited discriminatory power., (Copyright © 2024 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Telemonitoring (TM) of home non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been shown to facilitate home/outpatient therapy set-up. However, the impact of long-term TM on therapy dropouts, compliance and leak control has not yet been clearly determined. This study evaluated whether the NIV dropout rate was reduced by TM combined with remote patient support compared with a non-telemonitoring (NTM) pathway., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Data were obtained from all agencies of a single home care provider in France., Participants: Adults with chronic respiratory failure (n=659) who started nocturnal NIV between January 2017 and December 2019 and had ≥8 days of NIV therapy (51% male; mean age 68.5±13.8 years; 35.5% on long-term oxygen therapy) were included. The TM group included 275 patients who spent ≥80% of the follow-up using TM, and the NTM group included 384 patients who had 0 to ≤10 days of telemonitoring during follow-up., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the rate of NIV dropouts at 1 year (ie, treatment discontinuation, excluding deaths). Secondary outcomes included therapy compliance and leaks., Results: 82 patients died during follow-up. Significantly fewer patients in the TM vs NTM group had dropped out of NIV therapy at 1 year (13% vs 34%; p<0.001). After adjustment for age, sex, NIV usage at 1-month follow-up and the main underlying respiratory disease, TM was significantly associated with a lower risk of dropout (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.49; p<0.001). At 1, 4, 8 and 12 months, a greater proportion of patients in the TM vs NTM group had NIV usage of >4 hours/day and control of leaks., Conclusions: In patients starting home NIV, TM with home care provider first-line support was associated with a lower therapy dropout rate at 1 year, and better compliance and leak control, compared with standard follow-up., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RLM declares receipt of personal fees from Orkyn-Pharmadom, CGG declares receipt of personal fees from Orkyn-Pharmadom. FK is an employee of Pharmadom-Orkyn. JT is an employee of Air Liquide Healthcare. ACM and MR are employees of Alira Health. FG declares receipt of personal fees from Air Liquide Sante, Asten Sante, Inspire, Bioprojet, ResMed and Sefam, payment for presentations from Asten Sante, Bioprojet, Cidelec, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Philips Respironics, and ResMed, and non-financial support from Asten Sante. WT declares payment for presentations from Bioprojet and Astra Zeneca and non-financial support from Asten Sante. The authors perceive that these disclosures pose no academic conflict for this study., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The resolution of obstructive sleep apneas syndrome (OSAS) following bariatric surgery appears to be promising for the majority of patients although this resolution does not necessarily exhibit a linear correlation with weight loss. Previous small-scale studies have pinpointed a younger age and preoperative weight under 100kg as predictive factors of OSAS improvement OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to evaluate the evolution of OSAS in patients treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Additionally, we tried to identify potential predictive factors for OSAS improvement postsurgery., Setting: Brest Hospital, France, University Hospital., Methods: In this retrospective, observational study we analyzed a cohort of 44 patients who underwent bariatric surgery, between January 2015 and December 2021. Each patient underwent respiratory polygraphy (RP) or polysomnography (PSG) before and after the surgical procedure. We collected CPAP data (including effective pressure and adherence) before and during the 6 months following the intervention., Results: Within the study population, 68.18% of patients exhibited improved OSAS, as defined as an apnea-hypopnea index of less than 15 per hour. A higher mean oxygen saturation prior to surgery emerged as the sole predictive factor for OSAS improvement. CPAP adherence and therapeutic pressure value, 2 rarely studied parameters, did not show significant difference between improved and nonimproved patients., Conclusions: The rate of OSAS resolution after surgery is 68.18%, with only a higher mean oxygen saturation before surgery identified as a predictive factor for OSAS resolution., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a severe neurodegenerative disease. Given the inflammatory nature of ALS and the high number of ALS-related clinical circumstances (eg, prolonged immobilization and infections), patients with ALS may have a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE)., Objectives: To determine the annual incidence rate of VTE and the predictors of VTE in patients with ALS., Methods: We analyzed a prospective cohort of patients with ALS diagnosed between 2009 and 2019 followed in the Brest University Hospital ALS Centre., Results: Among 227 patients with ALS, VTE occurred in 19 patients during a median follow-up period of 717 days (IQR, 488-1308), yielding an annual incidence rate of 2.93% (95% CI, 1.88%-4.53%). Predictors for VTE were a family history of VTE (hazard ratio [HR], 15.24; 95% CI, 1.72-134.84; P  = .01), the presence of noninvasive ventilation at ALS diagnosis (HR, 6.98; 95% CI, 1.09-44.59; P  = .04) and a short time (ie, <213 days) between first symptoms and ALS diagnosis (HR, 5.48; 95% CI, 1.57-19.11; P  = .01). Recurrent VTE occurred within 3 months after stopping anticoagulation in 5 patients (26.3%)., Conclusion: The annual incidence of VTE in patients with ALS is high. Predictive factors of VTE were a VTE history, noninvasive ventilation, and a short time between first symptoms of ALS and ALS diagnosis., (© 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Background: The prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) is approximately 11-17 % in patients with an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AE-COPD). The optimal diagnostic strategy for PE in these patients remains undetermined., Aims: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of standard (revised Geneva and Wells PE scores combined with fixed D-dimer cut-off) and computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA)-sparing diagnostic strategies (ADJUST-PE, YEARS, PEGeD, 4PEPS) in patients with AE-COPD., Method: Post-hoc analyses of data from the multicenter prospective PEP study were performed. The primary outcome was the diagnostic failure rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during the entire study period. Secondary outcomes included diagnostic failure rate of PE and deep venous thrombosis (DVT), respectively, during the entire study period and the number of CTPA needed per diagnostic strategy., Results: 740 patients were included. The revised Geneva and Wells PE scores combined with fixed D-dimer cut-off had a diagnostic failure rate of VTE of 0.7 % (95%CI 0.3 %-1.7 %), but >70.0 % of the patients needed imaging. All CTPA-sparing diagnostic algorithms reduced the need for CTPAs (-10.1 % to -32.4 %, depending on the algorithm), at the cost of an increased VTE diagnosis failure rate of up to 2.1 % (95%CI 1.2 %-3.4 %)., Conclusion: Revised Geneva and Wells PE scores combined with fixed D-dimer cut-off were safe, but a high number of CTPA remained needed. CTPA-sparing algorithms would reduce imaging, at the cost of an increased VTE diagnosis failure rate that exceeds the safety threshold. Further studies are needed to improve diagnostic management in this population., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Dr. Couturaud reports having received research grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer and Bayer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Sanofi, Leo Pharma, Janssen and Astra Zeneca and having received travel support from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Leo Pharma, Pfizer. Dr. Bertoletti reports having received research grant support from Bayer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Actelion, Aspen, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer and MSD, and having received travel support from Aspen, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, MSD and Actelion. Dr. Pastre declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Roy declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Rambaud declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Mai declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Motreff declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Auffret declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Le Mao declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Gagnadoux declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Paleiron declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Schmidt declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Schmidt declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Sanchez reports having received research grant support from Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo and Portola Pharmaceuticals, and fees or non-financial support for consultancy activities from Actelion, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim and Chiesi. Dr. Bressollette declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Nonent declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Tromeur declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Salaun declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Mismetti reports having received research grants from Bayer, fees for board memberships from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer and Daiichi Sankyo, for lectures from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo and Sanofi, and for development of educational presentations from Bayer and Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer. Dr. Girard reports having received personal fees and non-financial support from Bayer and Leo Pharma. Dr. Lacut reports having received personal fees from Bayer-Health Care, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Lemarie declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. Dr. Meyer reports having received research grant support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, LEO Pharma Research Foundation and Sanofi, having been an uncompensated board member and a consultant for Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Leo Pharma and Pfizer, and having received travel support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma and Sanofi. Dr. Leroyer reports having received research grant support from Pfizer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer and Astra Zeneca and having received travel support from Bayer, Leo Pharma. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The diagnostic strategy for pulmonary embolism (PE) includes a D-dimer test when PE probability is low or intermediate, but false-positive D-dimer results are frequent and can result in an unnecessary computed tomography pulmonary angiogram. The PE rule-out criteria (PERC) rule excludes PE without D-dimer testing when pretest probability is <15%. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of the PERC rule strategy in patients included in the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbolica venosa (RIETE) registry., Methods: This retrospective cohort study used data from the RIETE registry, an ongoing, international prospective registry of patients with objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism. The primary outcome was the failure rate of the PERC strategy, represented by the proportion of PERC-negative (PERC-N) patients with a PE included in the registry. Secondary outcomes were a comparison of the clinical characteristics, treatment strategy, and outcome of PERC-N versus PERC-positive (PERC-P) patients at 3 months., Results: From 2001 to 2021, a total of 49,793 patients with acute PE were enrolled in the RIETE registry. We included 48,903 in the final analysis after exclusion of 890 patients with an undetermined PERC status. Only 346 patients were PERC-N with a failure rate of 0.7% (95% confidence interval 0.6%-0.8%). PERC-N patients presented more frequently with chest pain but less often with dyspnea, syncope, or hypotension. They also had subsegmental or segmental PE more frequently, were more often treated with direct oral anticoagulants, and received mechanical or pharmacological thrombolysis less often. In addition, PERC-N patients had a lower incidence of recurrent deep vein thrombosis, major bleeding, and death attributed to PE during the 3-month follow-up., Conclusions: A low failure rate of the PERC rule was observed in the RIETE registry, thus supporting its use to safely identify patients with an unlikely probability of PE., (© 2023 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Venous thromboembolism is a major complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We hypothesized that a weight-adjusted intermediate dose of anticoagulation may decrease the risk of venous thromboembolism COVID-19 patients., Methods: In this multicenter, randomised, open-label, phase 4, superiority trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes, we randomly assigned adult patients hospitalised in 20 French centers and presenting with acute respiratory SARS-CoV-2. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive an intermediate weight-adjusted prophylactic dose or a fixed-dose of subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin during the hospital stay. The primary outcome corresponded to symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (fatal) pulmonary embolism during hospitalization (COVI-DOSE ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT04373707)., Findings: Between May 2020, and April 2021, 1000 patients underwent randomisation in medical wards (noncritically ill) (80.1%) and intensive care units (critically ill) (19.9%); 502 patients were assigned to receive a weight-adjusted intermediate dose, and 498 received fixed-dose thromboprophylaxis. Symptomatic venous thromboembolism occurred in 6 of 502 patients (1.2%) in the weight-adjusted dose group and in 10 of 498 patients (2.1%) in the fixed-dose group (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.22-1.63; P = 0.31). There was a twofold increased risk of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding: 5.9% in the weight-adjusted dose group and 3.1% in the fixed-dose group (P = 0.034)., Interpretation: In the COVI-DOSE trial, the observed rate of thromboembolic events was lower than expected in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection, and the study was unable to show a significant difference in the risk of venous thromboembolism between the two low-molecular-weight-heparin regimens., Funding: French Ministry of Health, CAPNET, Grand-Est Region, Grand-Nancy Métropole., Competing Interests: Dr. Zuily reports grants from French Ministry of Health, grants from The Grand Est Regional Council, grants from The Grand Nancy Métropole, grants from The Comité ad hoc de pilotage national des essais thérapeutiques et autres recherches sur le COVID-19 (CAPNET, label Priorité Nationale de Recherche–National Research Priority), during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Leo Pharma, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Viatris, personal fees from Sanofi, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Lefevre reports grants from Gilead, grants from ViiV, outside the submitted work; Dr. Sanchez reports grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from Bayer, grants and personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Inari, personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Leo Pharma, personal fees from Chiesi, grants from Oxyvie, outside the submitted work; Dr. Empis De Vendin has nothing to disclose; Dr. De Ciancio has nothing to disclose; Dr. Arlet reports grants from Addmedical, grants and other from Novartis, outside the submitted work; Dr. Khider has nothing to disclose; Dr. Terriat has nothing to disclose; Dr. Greigert has nothing to disclose; Dr. Robert has nothing to disclose; Dr. Louis has nothing to disclose; Dr. Trinh-Duc has nothing to disclose; Dr. Rispal has nothing to disclose; Dr. Accassat reports other from Leo Pharma, other from Janssen, other from MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr. Thiery has nothing to disclose; Dr. Montani reports grants and personal fees from Acceleron, grants and personal fees from Janssen, grants and personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Bayer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Azarian has nothing to disclose; Dr. Meneveau reports grants, personal fees and other from Bayer, grants, personal fees and other from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants, personal fees and other from Pfizer, grants from Medtronic, grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, grants, personal fees and other from Abbott, personal fees from Inari, personal fees from Terumo, outside the submitted work; Dr. Soudet reports grants and personal fees from Leo Pharma, grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Le Mao has nothing to disclose; Dr. Maurier has nothing to disclose; Dr. Le Moing has nothing to disclose; Dr. Quéré reports other from Leo Pharma, outside the submitted work; Dr. Yelnik has nothing to disclose; Dr. Lefebvre reports personal fees and other from Pfizer, other from Eumedica, outside the submitted work; Dr. Martinot reports other from Menarini, other from Overcome, outside the submitted work; Dr. Delrue has nothing to disclose; Dr. Benhamou has nothing to disclose; Dr. Parent reports grants from Oxyvie, personal fees from MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr. Roy reports personal fees and other from Bayer, personal fees and other from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees and other from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees and other from Pfizer, personal fees and other from Aspen, personal fees and other from Sanofi, outside the submitted work; Ms. Presles has nothing to disclose; Dr. Goehringer has nothing to disclose; Dr. Mismetti reports personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Leo Pharma, personal fees from Aspen, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Bertoletti reports grants from Bayer, grants and personal fees from MSD, personal fees and other from Leo Pharma, personal fees and other from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees and other from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. Rossignol reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Cincor, personal fees from KBP, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from NovoNordisk, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Vifor/Relypsa, personal fees from Fresenius, personal fees and other from CardioRenal, personal fees from Idorsia, personal fees from Sequana, personal fees from Vifor, non-financial support from G3P, outside the submitted work; Dr. Couturaud reports grants and personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Bayer, grants and personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Merck Sharp and Dohme, personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Astra Zeneca, personal fees (board memberships or symposia) from Sanofi, personal fees (board memberships or symposia) from Janssen, personal fees (board memberships, symposia or travel) from Leo Pharma, outside the submitted work; Dr. Wahl has nothing to disclose; Dr. Thilly has nothing to disclose; Dr. Laporte reports personal fees from Lilly/Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Leo-Pharma, outside the submitted work., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background:  Hormonal exposure leads to an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) but the risk of VTE associated with assisted reproductive technology (ART) is not clearly determined., Methods:  We searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases and identified all relevant articles published up to February 1, 2021. The primary objective was to determine the frequency of VTE associated with ART. Secondary objectives were to determine (1) the risk of VTE associated with ART as compared to pregnancy without ART; (2) the risk of VTE associated with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS); and (3) to determine potential risk factors of VTE related to ART., Results:  Fourteen studies were included. The overall frequency of VTE associated with ART was 0.23% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.07-0.46). Women undergoing ART had a two- to threefold increased risk of VTE as compared to spontaneous pregnancy (relative risk [RR]: 2.66; 95% CI: 1.60-4.43). The overall frequency of VTE specifically related to OHSS was <0.001%. The risk of VTE after ART complicated by OHSS, as compared to ART without OHSS, was higher but not statistically significant (RR: 14.83; 95% CI: 0.86-255.62). Risk factors of VTE associated with ART were in vitro fertilization procedure (RR, odds ratio [OR], and hazard ratio varying from 1.77, 95% CI: 1.41-2.23 to 4.99, 95% CI: 1.24-20.05), hyperhomocysteinemia (OR: 15.2; 95% CI: 2.0-115.0), polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) (RR: 4.8; 95% CI: 1.7-13.4), successful ART leading to pregnancy (OR: 13.94; 95% CI: 1.41-137.45)., Conclusion:  Further large prospective studies on risk factors of VTE in women undergoing ART are needed in order to optimize thromboprophylaxis in this context., Competing Interests: P.M. participated in Strategy group ART, French Biomedicine Agency (no payment)., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a life-threatening complication of a pulmonary embolism (PE) whose incidence and predictors are not precisely determined., Objective: To determine the frequency and predictors for CTEPH after a first unprovoked PE., Patients/methods: In a randomized trial comparing an additional 18-month warfarin versus placebo in patients after a first unprovoked PE initially treated with vitamin K antagonist for 6 months, we applied recommended CTEPH screening strategies through an 8-year follow-up to determine cumulative incidence of CTEPH. CTEPH predictors were estimated using Cox models. Pulmonary vascular obstruction (PVO) and systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (sPAP) at PE diagnosis and 6 months were studied by receiver operating curves analysis. All CTEPH cases and whether they were incident or prevalent were adjudicated., Results: During a median follow-up of 8.7 years, nine CTEPH cases were diagnosed among 371 patients, with a cumulative incidence of 2.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-4.64), and of 1.31% (95% CI 0.01-2.60) after exclusion of five cases adjudicated as prevalent. At PE diagnosis, PVO > 45% and sPAP > 56 mmHg were associated with CTEPH with a hazard ratio (HR) of 33.00 (95% CI 1.64-667.00, p = .02) and 12.50 (95% CI 2.10-74.80, p < .01), respectively. Age > 65 years, lupus anticoagulant antibodies and non-O blood groups were also predictive of CTEPH. PVO > 14% and sPAP > 34 mmHg at 6 months were associated with CTEPH (HR 63.90 [95% CI 3.11-1310.00, p < .01]and HR 17.2 [95% CI 2.75-108, p < .01])., Conclusion: After a first unprovoked PE, CTEPH cumulative incidence was 2.8% during an 8-year follow-up. PVO and sPAP at PE diagnosis and at 6 months were the main predictors for CTEPH diagnosis., (© 2022 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Background: It was recently established that patients who developed VTE are at increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) compared with the general population. However, whether the anticoagulation used for VTE influences the risk of MACE remains undescribed., Research Question: Does the anticoagulant treatment for VTE affect the risk of subsequent MACE?, Study Design and Methods: This study included patients from a large prospective cohort who received only one family of anticoagulant treatment after the acute phase of VTE, including vitamin K antagonist (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). MACE included nonfatal acute coronary syndrome, nonfatal stroke, and all-cause death. The secondary outcome, MACE-2, included cardiovascular death instead of all-cause death. Cox proportional and Fine-Gray models served to study the relationship between anticoagulation characteristics and the risk of outcomes., Results: A total of 3,790 patients (47.2% male; mean age, 60.48 years) were included. A total of 1,228 patients (32.4%) were treated for 0 to 3 months (median in overall population, 6 months). Compared with these patients, those treated for 3 to 12 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.76) or > 12 months (HR, 0.47, 95% CI, 0.39-0.56) had a significant reduced risk of MACE following adjustment for confounders. Findings were similar for MACE-2 (sub-HR for 3-12 months, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.47-0.79]; sub-HR > 12 months, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.39-0.68]). After adjustment for confounders, there was a reduced risk of MACE (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.39-0.71) and MACE-2 (sub-HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.29-0.77) in patients treated with DOACs (vs VKAs)., Interpretation: Treatment of VTE for > 3 months is associated with a reduced risk of MACE, as is treatment with DOACs vs VKAs. These findings, which may influence the choice of anticoagulation strategies for VTE, need confirmation by randomized clinical trials., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Quantifying the pulmonary vascular obstruction index (PVOI) is essential for the management of patients with pulmonary embolism or chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). The reference method for quantifying the PVOI with planar lung ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) scintigraphy is the Meyer score, which was validated using pulmonary angiography as a reference standard. However, it is complex to use in daily practice. In contrast, a rapid and fast quantification method consists in estimating the PVOI based on the number of segmental perfusion defects. However, the accuracy of this method has never been evaluated. In this study, we aimed to compare PVOI quantification on planar V/Q scintigraphy assessed by a segmental visual scoring (SVS) to the Meyer score., Materials and Methods: The eligible study population consisted of consecutive patients who underwent planar V/Q scan for CTEPH screening. A central review was performed by three nuclear medicine physicians. PVOI was assessed by summing the number of segmental perfusion defects or equivalent (2 sub-segments = 1 segment = 5%) and by Meyer's method. The two interpretations were performed 6 months apart. A Spearman rank correlation coefficient was calculated to evaluate correlation between the two measurement methods. An intra-class correlation (ICC) was calculated to assess agreement. A Bland et Altman plot analysis was used to evaluate agreement between the two measurements., Results: A total of 226 V/Q scans were interpreted. Spearman rank correlation coefficient between SVS and Meyer was 0.963 (95%CI 0.952-0.971) for mismatched perfusion defects and 0.963 (95%CI 0.953-0.972) for perfusion defects regardless of ventilation. Intra-class correlation (ICC) for agreement was 0.978 (95%CI 0.972-0.983) for mismatched perfusion defects and 0.968 (95%CI 0.959-0.976) for perfusion defects regardless of ventilation. In Bland & Altmann analysis, the mean difference between the SVS method and the Meyer score was 0.42 and 0.61 for the mismatched or matched evaluation, respectively., Conclusion: Our study shows a high correlation, and low differences in PVOI quantification when using a segmental visual scoring (SVS) as compared to the Meyer score. The SVS has the great advantage to be easy and rapid to apply in daily practice., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Le Pennec, Tromeur, Orione, Robin, Le Mao, Gut-Gobert, Le Gal, Salaün and Le Roux.)

Background: We aimed to validate and to refine current recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk classification., Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of a multicentre cohort including 1881 patients with a first symptomatic VTE prospectively followed after anticoagulation discontinuation. The primary objective was to validate the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) risk classification in predicting recurrence risk. The secondary objective was to evaluate a refined ISTH classification based on the recurrence risk estimate for each individual risk factor., Results: During a 4.8-year median follow-up after anticoagulation discontinuation, symptomatic recurrent VTE occurred in 230 patients (12.2%). Based on the ISTH classification, patients with unprovoked VTE or VTE with minor or major persistent risk factors had a 2-fold increased recurrence risk compared with those with VTE and major transient risk factors. Recurrence risk was not increased in patients with minor transient factors (hazard ratio (HR) 1.31, 95% CI 0.84-2.06). Individual risk factors analysis identified hormone-related VTE (pregnancy: HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08-0.82; oestrogens: HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.14-0.47) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (HR 5.84, 95% CI 1.82-18.70). After reclassification of these factors as major transient for the former and major persistent for the latter, the modified ISTH classification allowed us to accurately discriminate between patients at low risk of recurrence ( i.e. with major transient risk factors) and those at high risk of recurrence ( i.e. without major transient risk factors)., Conclusions: Among patients who stopped anticoagulation after a first VTE, a refined ISTH classification based on recurrence risk intensity of individual factors allowed discrimination between patients at low recurrence risk, including hormonal exposure in women, and patients at high recurrence risk., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: D. Jimenez has served as an advisor or consultant for Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, ROVI and Sanofi; served as a speaker or a member of a speakers’ bureau for Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, ROVI and Sanofi; received grants for clinical research from Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi and ROVI. E. Le Moigne reports having received research grants from Leo Pharma. C. Leroyer reports having received research grant support from Pfizer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer and AstraZeneca and having received travel support from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, Intermune and Actelion. K. Lacut reports having received personal fees from Bayer Health Care, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim. F. Couturaud reports having received research grant support from Pfizer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer and AstraZeneca, and having received travel support from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Leo Pharma and Actelion. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research., (Copyright ©The authors 2022. For reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org.)

Introduction: The increased risk of arterial thrombotic (ATE) after VTE, particularly when they are unprovoked or cancer-associated has been established. However, the risk factors of ATE after these VTE remain unclear., Material and Methods: Using cause-specific hazard regression models, we determined risk factors of ATE (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, digestive tract ischemia, or renal ischemia) in 2242 patients with unprovoked VTE and in 914 patients with cancer-associated VTE from a multi-center prospective cohort., Results: Of patients with unprovoked-VTE, 174 developed ATE (7.8%, incidence: 1.26 per 100 patient-years) during follow-up (median: 68 months). Among patients with cancer-associated VTE, 57 developed ATE (6.2%, incidence: 1.98 per 100 patient-years) during follow-up (median: 30 months). After multivariable analysis, the identified risk factors of ATE in patients with unprovoked-VTE were age > 65 years (vs. <50 years, HR 2.59, 95% CI: 1.56-4.29), past history of symptomatic atherosclerosis (HR 2.11, 95% CI: 1.40-3.19), and treatment with low molecule weight heparin (vs. vitamin K antagonists, HR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.13-4.52). In patients with cancer-associated VTE, the identified risk factors of ATE were: past history of symptomatic atherosclerosis (HR: 3.13, 95% CI: 1.72-5.67), and ongoing anticoagulation at the diagnosis of VTE (HR: 2.77, 95% CI: 1.07-7.22)., Conclusions: The risk of ATE after unprovoked VTE and after cancer-associated VTE, is determined by some classic cardiovascular risk factors and appears to be influenced by anticoagulant treatment introduced for VTE, as well as the presence or absence of ongoing anticoagulation at the diagnosis of VTE., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Women with a previous venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at risk of recurrence during pregnancy., Objectives: We aimed to assess the incidence rate of recurrent VTE during pregnancy, according to the period of pregnancy, and the clinical parameters associated with recurrence, in a prospective cohort of women of childbearing age after a first VTE., Patients/methods: A total of 189 women aged 15-49 years with a first documented VTE were followed until a subsequent pregnancy of at least 20 weeks' gestation between 2000 and 2020. VTE recurrences during pregnancy were recorded, as were potential clinical risk factors for recurrence., Results: Recurrent VTE occurred in six women during antepartum: five during the first trimester (incidence rate 106.4 per 1000 women-years) (95% confidence interval [CI] 46.3-226.0); none during the second trimester; and one during the third trimester (incidence rate 27.0 per 1000 women-years [95% CI 4.8-138.2]). During postpartum, recurrences occurred in 11 women (incidence rate 212.8 per 1000 women-years [95% CI 119.9-349.1]). These 17 recurrent VTEs presented as pulmonary embolism ± deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in five patients and isolated DVT in 12. Failure of thromboprophylaxis occurred in two cases (33.3%) antepartum and in 10 cases (90.9%) postpartum. In multivariable analysis, only obesity (defined on prepregnancy body mass index) was associated with recurrent VTE (odds ratio 3.34 [95% CI 1.11-10.05, p = .03])., Conclusions: This study confirms a high risk of recurrent VTE postpartum, despite thromboprophylaxis, in women with a previous VTE. Only obesity was associated with VTE recurrence during pregnancy, suggesting that low-dose anticoagulation might not be appropriate in obese pregnant women., (© 2022 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Objective: The diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a major challenge as it is a curable cause of pulmonary hypertension (PH). Ventilation/Perfusion (V/Q) lung scintigraphy is the imaging modality of choice for the screening of CTEPH. However, there is no consensus on the criteria to use for interpretation. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of various interpretation criteria of planar V/Q scintigraphy for the screening of CTEPH in patients with PH., Methods: The eligible study population consisted of consecutive patients with newly diagnosed PH in the Brest University Hospital, France. Final diagnosis (CTEPH or non-CTEPH) was established in a referential center on the management of PH, based on the ESC/ERS guidelines and a minimum follow-up of 3 years. A retrospective central review of planar V/Q scintigraphy was performed by three nuclear physicians blinded to clinical findings and to final diagnosis. The number, extent (sub-segmental or segmental) and type (matched or mismatched) of perfusion defects were reported. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated for various criteria based on the number of mismatched perfusion defects and the number of perfusion defects (regardless of ventilation). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated and areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated for both., Results: A total of 226 patients with newly diagnosed PH were analyzed. Fifty six (24.8%) were diagnosed with CTEPH while 170 patients (75.2%) were diagnosed with non-CTEPH. The optimal threshold was 2.5 segmental mismatched perfusion defects, providing a sensitivity of 100 % (95% CI 93.6-100%) and a specificity of 94.7% (95%CI 90.3-97.2%). Lower diagnostic cut-offs of mismatched perfusion defects provided similar sensitivity but lower specificity. Ninety five percent of patients with CTEPH had more than 4 segmental mismatched defects. An interpretation only based on perfusion provided similar sensitivity but a specificity of 81.8% (95%CI 75.3-86.9%)., Conclusion: Our study confirmed the high diagnostic performance of planar V/Q scintigraphy for the screening of CTEPH in patients with PH. The optimal diagnostic cut-off for interpretation was 2.5 segmental mismatched perfusion defects. An interpretation only based on perfusion defects provided similar sensitivity but lower specificity., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Le Pennec, Tromeur, Orione, Robin, Le Mao, De Moreuil, Jevnikar, Hoffman, Savale, Couturaud, Sitbon, Montani, Jaïs, Le Gal, Salaün, Humbert and Le Roux.)

Heart rate variability (HRV) is a mean to evaluate cardiac effects of autonomic nervous system activity, and a relation between HRV and outcome has been proposed in various types of patients. We attempted to evaluate the best determinants of such variation in survival prediction using a physiological data-warehousing program. Plethysmogram tracings (PPG) were recorded at 75 Hz from the standard monitoring system, for a 2 h period, during the 24 h following ICU admission. Physiological data recording was associated with metadata collection. HRV was derived from PPG in either the temporal and non-linear domains. 540 consecutive patients were recorded. A lower LF/HF, SD2/SD1 ratios and Shannon entropy values on admission were associated with a higher ICU mortality. SpO2/FiO2 ratio and HRV parameters (LF/HF and Shannon entropy) were independent correlated with mortality in the multivariate analysis. Machine-learning using neural network (kNN) enabled to determine a simple decision tree combining the three best determinants (SDNN, Shannon Entropy, SD2/SD1 ratio) of a composite outcome index. HRV measured on admission enables to predict outcome in the ICU or at Day-28, independently of the admission diagnosis, treatment and mechanical ventilation requirement.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02893462., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: The length of hospital stay (LOS) for acute pulmonary embolism (PE) varies considerably. Whether the upfront use of a PE prognostic assessment and management pathway is effective in reducing the LOS remains unknown., Methods: We conducted a randomised controlled trial of adults hospitalised for acute PE: patients were assigned either to a prognostic assessment and management pathway involving risk stratification followed by predefined criteria for mobilisation and discharge (intervention group) or to usual care (control group). The primary end-point was LOS. The secondary end-points were the cost of prognostic tests and of hospitalisation, and 30-day clinical outcomes., Results: Of 500 patients who underwent randomisation, 498 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The median LOS was 4.0 days (interquartile range (IQR) 3.7-4.2 days) in the intervention group and 6.1 days (IQR 5.7-6.5 days) in the control group (p<0.001). The mean total cost of prognostic tests was EUR 174.76 in the intervention group, compared with EUR 233.12 in the control group (mean difference EUR -58.37, 95% CI EUR -84.34- to -32.40). The mean total hospitalisation cost per patient was EUR 2085.66 in the intervention group, compared with EUR 3232.97 in the control group (mean difference EUR -1147.31, 95% CI EUR -1414.97- to -879.65). No significant differences were observed in 30-day readmission (4.0% versus 4.8%), all-cause mortality (2.4% versus 2.0%) or PE-related mortality (0.8% versus 1.2%) rates., Conclusions: The use of a prognostic assessment and management pathway was effective in reducing the LOS for acute PE., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: D. Jiménez has served as an advisor or consultant for Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, ROVI and Sanofi; served as a speaker or a member of a speakers’ bureau for Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, ROVI and Sanofi; and has received grants for clinical research from Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi and ROVI. Conflict of interest: C. Rodríguez has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F. León has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L. Jara-Palomares has served as an advisor or consultant for Actelion Pharmaceuticals, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Leo Pharma, Menarini, Pfizer, GSK and ROVI. Conflict of interest: R. López-Reyes has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: P. Ruiz-Artacho has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Elías has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Otero has served as an advisor or consultant for Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Leo Pharma, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, ROVI and Sanofi; and received grants for clinical research from Leo Pharma and Bayer Hispania SL. Conflict of interest: A. García-Ortega has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Rivas-Guerrero has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Abelaria has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Jiménez has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Muriel has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Morillo has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Barrios has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Le Mao has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R.D. Yusen has received research funding from Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer and Portola in the past 3 years; and has served as a consultant for Bayer HealthCare, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithkline, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Ortho Pharmaceuticals, Organon, Pfizer, Portola, Sanofi and SCIOS in the past 3 years. Conflict of interest: B. Bikdeli reports that he is a consulting expert, on behalf of the plaintiff, for litigation related to two specific brand models of inferior vena cava filters. Conflict of interest: M. Monreal has served as an advisor or consultant for Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma and Sanofi; served as a speaker or a member of a speakers’ bureau for Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma and Sanofi; and received grants for clinical research from Sanofi and Bayer. Conflict of interest: J.L. Lobo has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2022. For reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org.)

Background: Growing evidence suggests the relationship between obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Few studies focused on VTE recurrence risk associated with OSA after anticoagulation cessation., Methods: In a prospective cohort study, patients with documented VTE, were followed for an indefinite length of time and VTE recurrence were documented and adjudicated. The primary outcome was recurrent VTE after anticoagulation discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and the clinical presentation of VTE. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify risk factors for recurrence and mortality., Results: Among the 2109 patients with documented VTE included, 74 patients had moderate to severe OSA diagnosis confirmed by home sleep test or polysomnography. During a median follow-up of 4.8 (interquartile range 2.5-8.0) years recurrent VTE occurred in 252 patients (9 with OSA and 243 without OSA). The recurrence risk in the univariable and multivariable analysis was not increased in patients with OSA, regardless of the time of diagnosis (before or after index VTE or pooled). VTE phenotype was significantly more often PE with or without associated deep vein thrombosis in the first event and recurrence for OSA patients compared to non-OSA patients. The risk of death was not increased in the OSA population compared to non-OSA patients in multivariable analysis., Conclusions: In patients with OSA and VTE, the risk of all-cause mortality and VTE recurrence after anticoagulation discontinuation was not increased compared to non-OSA patients., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) encompasses various parenchymal lung disorders, which has the potential to increase the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). To evaluate, in patients with ILD and VTE, the risk of recurrent VTE during follow-up after stopping anticoagulation. This was a cohort of patients with a first VTE recruited between 1997 and 2015. The primary outcome was adjudicated fatal or nonfatal recurrent VTE after stopping anticoagulation. Main secondary outcomes were major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding under anticoagulation. Among 4314 patients with VTE, 50 had ILD diagnosed before VTE. Of these, anticoagulation was stopped in 30 patients after a median duration of 180 days and continued indefinitely in 20 patients. During a median follow-up of 27.8 months after anticoagulation discontinuation, recurrent VTE occurred in 15 on 30 patients (annual incidence of 19.2 events per 100-person-years [95%CI 12.0-29.3], case-fatality rate of 6.7% [95%CI 1.21-29.8]). The risk of recurrence was threefold higher when VTE was unprovoked and case-fatality rate of recurrence was increased by 3 when VTE index was PE. During the anticoagulant period, (median duration of 8.6 months), 6 patients had a major or clinically relevant bleeding (annual incidence of 7.3 events per 100-person-years [95%CI 3.4-15.1], case-fatality rate of 16.7% [95%CI 3.0-56.4]). In patients with ILD, the risk of recurrent VTE after stopping anticoagulation and the risk of bleeding under anticoagulation were very high. Our results suggest that anticoagulation should not be prolonged beyond 3-6 months of anticoagulation in most of cases., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Haemoptysis is a potentially life-threatening symptom, which require immediate management. Haemoptysis is a challenging situation because the potential numerous causes lead to strongly different therapeutic options (medical, surgical, systematic embolization). When haemoptysis occurred at the acute phase of pulmonary embolism, anticoagulation should be stopped and inferior vena cava filter is justified. Based on a case report of massive haemoptysis related to pulmonary infarction (i.e., no other causes) in a patient with a unprovoked intermediate high-risk pulmonary embolism, we describe the dilemma set in the paradox between the need for stopping anticoagulation and the need to treat the cause of haemoptysis which is also anticoagulation. If anticoagulation should be stopped, however, the optimal management regarding the use of specific reversal agents or prothrombotic plasma concentrates remains uncertain and weakly documented. After haemoptysis has been resolved, there is also uncertainty on restarting anticoagulation modalities. Regarding long-term management, the decision to stop at three months or to prolong indefinitely based on international recommendation is also challenging in the case of unprovoked severe pulmonary embolism. In this particularly high risk situation, multidisciplinary expertise is essential., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background:  We aimed to assess whether high pulmonary vascular obstruction index (PVOI) measured at the time of pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis is associated with an increased risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE)., Study Design and Methods:  French prospective cohort of patients with a symptomatic episode of PE diagnosed with spiral computerized tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) or ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) lung scan and a follow-up of at least 6 months after anticoagulation discontinuation. PVOI was assessed based on the available diagnostic exam (V/Q lung scan or CTPA). All patients had standardized follow-up and independent clinicians adjudicated all deaths and recurrent VTE events. Main outcome was recurrent VTE after stopping anticoagulation., Results:  A total of 418 patients with PE were included. During a median follow-up period of 3.6 (1.2-6.0) years, 109 recurrences occurred. In multivariate analysis, PVOI ≥ 40% was an independent risk factor for recurrence (hazard ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval 1.20-2.62, p  < 0.01), whether PE was provoked by a major transient risk factor or not. A threshold at 41% was identified as the best value associated with the risk of recurrence 6 months after stopping anticoagulation (area under curve = 0.64)., Conclusion:  PVOI ≥ 40% at PE diagnosis was an independent risk factor for recurrence VTE. Further prospective validation studies are needed., Competing Interests: F.C. reports having received research grant support from Pfizer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer and Astra Zeneca and having received travel support from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, Intermune, and Actelion. C.O. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. C.T. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.R. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. R.L.M. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.-Y.L.R. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.-Y.S. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. C.H. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. L.B. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. P.-Y.L.F. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. M.N. declares he has no conflict of interest related to this research. M.G. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. E.P. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. C.A.L. declares she has no conflict of interest related to this research. K.L. reports having received personal fees from Bayer-Health Care, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Boehringer Ingelheim. C.L. reports having received research grant support from Pfizer and fees for board memberships or symposia from Bayer and Astra Zeneca and having received travel support from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Leo Pharma, Intermune, and Actelion. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)