Literature DB >> 21713328

A comparison of the original and simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index.

Carmen Venetz1, David Jiménez, Marie Mean, Drahomir Aujesky.   

Abstract

The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) is a validated clinical prognostic model for patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). Recently, a simplified version of the PESI was developed. We sought to compare the prognostic performance of the original and simplified PESI. Using data from 15,531 patients with PE, we compared the proportions of patients classified as low versus higher risk between the original and simplified PESI and estimated 30-day mortality within each risk group. To assess the models' accuracy to predict mortality, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values and likelihood ratios for low- versus higher-risk patients. We also compared the models' discriminative power by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve. The overall 30-day mortality was 9.3%. The original PESI classified a significantly greater proportion of patients as low-risk than the simplified PESI (40.9% vs. 36.8%; p<0.001). Low-risk patients based on the original and simplified PESI had a mortality of 2.3% and 2.7%, respectively. The original and simplified PESI had similar sensitivities (90% vs. 89%), negative predictive values (98% vs. 97%), and negative likelihood ratios (0.23 vs. 0.28) for predicting mortality. The original PESI had a significantly greater discriminatory power than the simplified PESI (area under the ROC curve 0.78 [95% CI: 0.77-0.79] vs. 0.72 [95% CI: 0.71-0.74]; p<0.001). In conclusion, even though the simplified PESI accurately identified patients at low-risk of adverse outcomes, the original PESI classified a higher proportion of patients as low-risk and had a greater discriminatory power than the simplified PESI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21713328     DOI: 10.1160/TH11-04-0263

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 0340-6245            Impact factor:   5.249


  8 in total

Review 1.  Pulmonary embolism response teams.

Authors:  Maya Serhal; Ihab S Haddadin; Gustavo A Heresi; Deborah A Hornacek; Mehdi H Shishehbor; John R Bartholomew
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  Claims-based or clinical models for predicting 90-day post-pulmonary embolism outcomes.

Authors:  Cecilia Becattini; Giancarlo Agnelli
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.397

3.  The safety and efficacy of systemic versus catheter-based therapies: application of a prognostic model by a pulmonary embolism response team.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Iskandar; Essa Hariri; Christopher Kanaan; Nicholas Kassis; Hayaan Kamran; Denise Sese; Colin Wright; Mark Marinescu; Scott J Cameron
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 2.300

4.  Outpatient or inpatient treatment for acute pulmonary embolism: a retrospective cohort study of 439 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Sebastian Werth; Virginia Kamvissi; Thoralf Stange; Eberhard Kuhlisch; Norbert Weiss; Jan Beyer-Westendorf
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 5.  The prognostic value of pulmonary embolism severity index in acute pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiao-Yu Zhou; Su-Qin Ben; Hong-Lin Chen; Song-Shi Ni
Journal:  Respir Res       Date:  2012-12-04

Review 6.  Guidance for the practical management of the heparin anticoagulants in the treatment of venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Maureen A Smythe; Jennifer Priziola; Paul P Dobesh; Diane Wirth; Adam Cuker; Ann K Wittkowsky
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.300

7.  Right atrial to left atrial area ratio on early echocardiography predicts long-term survival after acute pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Vincent Chow; Austin Chin Chwan Ng; Tommy Chung; Liza Thomas; Leonard Kritharides
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 2.062

Review 8.  Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Antoine Elias; Susan Mallett; Marie Daoud-Elias; Jean-Noël Poggi; Mike Clarke
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 2.692

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.