INTRODUCTION: A pulmonary embolism (PE) is a leading cause of mortality in hospitalized patients, yet the prevalence of PE in sickle cell disease (SCD) and its relation to disease severity or intrinsic hypercoagulability are not established. METHODS: We estimated inpatient PE incidence and prevalence among SCD and non-SCD populations in Pennsylvania, and compared severity of illness and mortality, using Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4) discharge data, 2001-2006. Risk factors for PE were assessed in a case-control study of discharges from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Archival Records System (MARS). RESULTS: The incidence of inpatient PE was higher in the SCD PA population than in the non-SCD Pennsylvania population, 2001-2006. The PE prevalence among SCD discharges ≤ 50 years of age, 0.57%, was similar to that in non-SCD Pennsylvania discharges, 0.60%, and unchanged after adjustment for race. Among SCD discharges, those developing PE were significantly older, with a longer length of stay, greater severity of illness and higher mortality, P < 0.001, than SCD without a PE. Among PE discharges, SCD had a similar severity of illness, P = 0.77, and mortality, P = 0.39, but underwent fewer computerized tomographic scans, P = 0.006, than non-SCD with PE. In the local case-control study, no clinical or laboratory feature was associated with PE. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PE is higher and chest computed tomography (CT) utilization is lower in SCD than non-SCD inpatients, suggesting that PE may be under-diagnosed.
INTRODUCTION:A pulmonary embolism (PE) is a leading cause of mortality in hospitalized patients, yet the prevalence of PE in sickle cell disease (SCD) and its relation to disease severity or intrinsic hypercoagulability are not established. METHODS: We estimated inpatient PE incidence and prevalence among SCD and non-SCD populations in Pennsylvania, and compared severity of illness and mortality, using Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4) discharge data, 2001-2006. Risk factors for PE were assessed in a case-control study of discharges from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Archival Records System (MARS). RESULTS: The incidence of inpatient PE was higher in the SCDPA population than in the non-SCD Pennsylvania population, 2001-2006. The PE prevalence among SCD discharges ≤ 50 years of age, 0.57%, was similar to that in non-SCD Pennsylvania discharges, 0.60%, and unchanged after adjustment for race. Among SCD discharges, those developing PE were significantly older, with a longer length of stay, greater severity of illness and higher mortality, P < 0.001, than SCD without a PE. Among PE discharges, SCD had a similar severity of illness, P = 0.77, and mortality, P = 0.39, but underwent fewer computerized tomographic scans, P = 0.006, than non-SCD with PE. In the local case-control study, no clinical or laboratory feature was associated with PE. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PE is higher and chest computed tomography (CT) utilization is lower in SCD than non-SCD inpatients, suggesting that PE may be under-diagnosed.
Authors: Susan R Kahn; Wendy Lim; Andrew S Dunn; Mary Cushman; Francesco Dentali; Elie A Akl; Deborah J Cook; Alex A Balekian; Russell C Klein; Hoang Le; Sam Schulman; M Hassan Murad Journal: Chest Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: H J Wolters; H ten Cate; L L Thomas; D P Brandjes; A van der Ende; Y van der Heiden; L W Statius van Eps Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 1995-07 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: E P Vichinsky; L D Neumayr; A N Earles; R Williams; E T Lennette; D Dean; B Nickerson; E Orringer; V McKie; R Bellevue; C Daeschner; E A Manci Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-06-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elizabeth A Manci; Donald E Culberson; Yih-Ming Yang; Todd M Gardner; Randall Powell; Johnson Haynes; Arvind K Shah; Vipul N Mankad Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: Megan Z Roberts; G Eric Gaskill; Julie Kanter-Washko; T Rogers Kyle; Brittany C Jones; Nicole M Bohm Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 2.300