PulmCCM

PulmCCM

Catheter-based interventions for PE are blessed by AHA, ACCP and friends

Go now, and may the grace of guidelines shine upon you

PulmCCM's avatar
PulmCCM
Mar 09, 2026
∙ Paid

Through its periodically updated guideline statements, the American College of Chest Physicians has traditionally defined standard care for acute pulmonary embolism. (PulmCCM is not affiliated with any specialty society.)

ACCP’s most recent 2021 guidelines were quite conservative, recommending anticoagulation (low molecular weight heparin) as a standard therapy, and endorsing systemic thrombolysis (e.g., tPA or TNK) for PE with hypotension.

Catheter-directed thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy were barely mentioned and not endorsed, owing to the minimal evidence base comparing these treatments to the reference standard of anticoagulation.

This reticence was growing disconnected from clinical practice, where catheter-based treatments are being increasingly performed for many, if not most, significant PEs at some centers.

In 2026, the American Heart Association, ACCP, and seven other specialty societies relieved this tension by issuing a new guideline that recommends catheter-based therapies as reasonable treatments for virtually all patients requiring hospitalization.

The guidance goes further, designating both CDT and MT for the first time as acceptable substitutes for systemic thrombolysis in hemodynamically unstable patients with PE.

And it goes further than that, informally endorsing mechanical thrombectomy over catheter-directed thrombolysis for its perceived advantages.

The only indication reserved solely for systemic thrombolysis was as rescue therapy in patients with cardiac arrest or cardiogenic shock refractory to vasopressors.


New Guideline for Scoring Pulmonary Embolism Severity: What to Know

New Guideline for Scoring Pulmonary Embolism Severity: What to Know

PulmCCM
·
Mar 2
Read full story
New Guideline: Pulmonary Embolism Evaluation and Management

New Guideline: Pulmonary Embolism Evaluation and Management

PulmCCM
·
Feb 25
Read full story

Why the abrupt change? Did a tsunami of evidence arrive in the past five years, washing away any vestige of doubt as to the benefits of invasive therapies for pulmonary embolism?

Let’s take a look. And be sure to reach all the way to the bottom of the cereal box to get a special secret decoder ring to let you read the hidden messages embedded in the guidelines.

Patients in shock (E1)

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to PulmCCM to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2026 PulmCCM LLC · Publisher Terms
Substack · Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start your SubstackGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture