Logo

Log In Sign Up |  An official publication of: American College of Emergency Physicians
Navigation
  • Home
  • Multimedia
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
  • Clinical
    • Airway Managment
    • Case Reports
    • Critical Care
    • Guidelines
    • Imaging & Ultrasound
    • Pain & Palliative Care
    • Pediatrics
    • Resuscitation
    • Trauma & Injury
  • Resource Centers
    • mTBI Resource Center
  • Career
    • Practice Management
      • Benchmarking
      • Reimbursement & Coding
      • Care Team
      • Legal
      • Operations
      • Quality & Safety
    • Awards
    • Certification
    • Compensation
    • Early Career
    • Education
    • Leadership
    • Profiles
    • Retirement
    • Work-Life Balance
  • Columns
    • ACEP4U
    • Airway
    • Benchmarking
    • Brief19
    • By the Numbers
    • Coding Wizard
    • EM Cases
    • End of the Rainbow
    • Equity Equation
    • FACEPs in the Crowd
    • Forensic Facts
    • From the College
    • Images in EM
    • Kids Korner
    • Medicolegal Mind
    • Opinion
      • Break Room
      • New Spin
      • Pro-Con
    • Pearls From EM Literature
    • Policy Rx
    • Practice Changers
    • Problem Solvers
    • Residency Spotlight
    • Resident Voice
    • Skeptics’ Guide to Emergency Medicine
    • Sound Advice
    • Special OPs
    • Toxicology Q&A
    • WorldTravelERs
  • Resources
    • ACEP.org
    • ACEP Knowledge Quiz
    • Issue Archives
    • CME Now
    • Annual Scientific Assembly
      • ACEP14
      • ACEP15
      • ACEP16
      • ACEP17
      • ACEP18
      • ACEP19
    • Annals of Emergency Medicine
    • JACEP Open
    • Emergency Medicine Foundation
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Medical Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Awards
    • Authors
    • Article Submission
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright Information

ACEP Clinical Policy Review: Suspected Pulmonary Embolism

By Francis M. Fesmire, MD, FACEP, ACEP News Contributing Writer | on June 1, 2011 | 0 Comment
From the College
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

In the June 2011 issue of the Annals of Emergency Medicine, the American College of Emergency Physicians published a clinical policy focusing on critical issues in the emergency department evaluation and management of adult patients presenting with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). This is a revision of a clinical policy on suspected PE that was published in 2003.

You Might Also Like
  • Clinical Guideline Review: Diagnosis of DVT
  • ACEP Revises Venous Thromboembolism Clinical Policy
  • ACEP Clinical Policy Review: Evaluation and Management of Adult Patients in the ED with Asymptomatic Elevated BP
Explore This Issue
ACEP News: Vol 30 – No 06 – June 2011

This clinical policy can also be found on ACEP’s website (www.acep.org) and will be submitted for abstraction on the National Guideline Clearinghouse website (www.guidelines.gov).

This clinical policy takes an evidence-based approach to answering six frequently encountered questions related to emergency department decision making. Recommendations (Level A, B, or C) for patient management are provided based on the strength of evidence using the Clinical Policies Committee’s well-established methodology: Level A recommendations represent patient management principles that reflect a high degree of clinical certainty; Level B recommendations represent patient management principles that reflect moderate clinical certainty; Level C recommendations represent other patient management strategies based on Class III studies, or in the absence of any adequate published literature, based on consensus of the members of the Clinical Policies Committee.

During development, this clinical policy was reviewed and expert review comments were received from individual physicians in the fields of emergency medicine and cardiology, and from individual members of the American College of Chest Physicians, the American College of Radiology, ACEP’s Emergency Ultrasound Section, and ACEP’s Quality and Performance Committee. Their responses were used to refine and enhance this policy further; however, their responses did not imply endorsement of this clinical policy.

It is estimated that 650,000 to 900,000 individuals have pulmonary embolism each year in the United States, resulting in approximately 200,000 deaths. Furthermore, survivors of pulmonary embolism can experience disabling morbidity from pulmonary hypertension or postthrombotic syndrome. Since publication of the 2003 ACEP clinical policy on pulmonary embolism, there have been more than 1,000 publications each year on the subject of pulmonary embolism. The 2011 policy focuses on six critical questions of interest and/or controversy that have developed or still exist since the formulation of the 2003 policy. Due to the strong association between deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism, commonly known as venous thromboembolism (VTE) disease, it is difficult to discuss one without the other. For this reason, ACEP has decided to focus on pulmonary embolism and not update the 2003 ACEP policy on deep vein thrombosis.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 | Single Page

Topics: ACEPACEP Clinical Policy ReviewAmerican College of Emergency PhysiciansCardiovascularClinical ExamClinical GuidelineClinical PolicyDeathDiagnosisEducationEmergency MedicineEmergency PhysicianImaging and UltrasoundPulmonary

Related

  • FACEPs in the Crowd: Dr. John Ludlow

    November 5, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • ACEP4U: the ACEP/CORD Teaching Fellowship

    November 4, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • Dr. Joe Sachs and “The Pitt” Redefine Public Health Education Through Storytelling

    July 3, 2025 - 0 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP Now: November 2025

Download PDF

Read More

No Responses to “ACEP Clinical Policy Review: Suspected Pulmonary Embolism”

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*
*


Wiley
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • Advertise
  • Cookie Preferences
Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 2333-2603