Literature DB >> 24736129

Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria vs D-dimer testing in low-risk patients for pulmonary embolism: a retrospective study.

J Bokobza1, A Aubry1, N Nakle2, C Vincent-Cassy2, D Pateron3, C Devilliers4, B Riou5, P Ray6, Y Freund7.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVES: The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC) score has shown excellent negative predictive value; however, its use in the European population with high prevalence of PE is controversial. In Europe, PERC is not part of routine practice. For low-risk patients, guidelines recommend D-dimer testing, followed if positive by imaging study. We aimed to study the rate of diagnosis of PE after D-dimer testing in PERC-negative patients that could have been discharged if PERC was applied.
METHOD: This was a multicenter retrospective study in Paris, France. We included all patients with a suspicion of PE who had D-dimer testing in the emergency department, low pre-test probability, and a negative PERC score (that was retrospectively calculated). Patients with insufficient record to calculate PERC score were excluded. The primary end point was the rate of PE diagnosis before discharge in this population. Secondary end points included rate of invasive imaging studies and subsequent adverse events.
RESULTS: We screened 4301 patients who had D-dimer testing, 1070 of whom were PERC negative and could be analyzed. The mean age was 35 years and 46% were men. D-dimer was positive (>500 ng/L) in 167 (16%) of them; CTPA or V/Q scan was performed in 153 (14%) cases. PE was confirmed in 5 cases (total rate 0.5%, 95% confidence interval 0.1%-1.1%). Fifteen patients (1%) experienced non-severe adverse events.
CONCLUSION: D-dimer testing in PERC-negative patients led to a diagnosis of PE in 0.5% of them, with 15% of patients undergoing unnecessary irradiative imaging studies.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24736129     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.03.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Emerg Med        ISSN: 0735-6757            Impact factor:   2.469


  6 in total

1.  Serial use of existing clinical decisions aids can reduce computed tomography pulmonary angiography for pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Robert Russell Ehrman; Adrienne Nicole Malik; Reid Kenneth Smith; Zeid Kalarikkal; Andrew Huang; Ryan Michael King; Rubin David Green; Brian James O'Neil; Robert Leigh Sherwin
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2021-03-20       Impact factor: 3.397

2.  Qualitative Study to Understand Ordering of CT Angiography to Diagnose Pulmonary Embolism in the Emergency Room Setting.

Authors:  Soterios Gyftopoulos; Silas W Smith; Emma Simon; Masha Kuznetsova; Leora I Horwitz; Danil V Makarov
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2017-10-19       Impact factor: 5.532

3.  Prognostic value of Mastora obstruction score in acute pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Jolita Račkauskienė; Vaida Gedvilaitė; Mindaugas Matačiūnas; Mažvilė Abrutytė; Edvardas Danila
Journal:  Acta Med Litu       Date:  2019

4.  Pulmonary Embolism Masquerading as High Altitude Pulmonary Edema at High Altitude.

Authors:  Prativa Pandey; Benu Lohani; Holly Murphy
Journal:  High Alt Med Biol       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 1.981

5.  Putting Meaning into Meaningful Use: A Roadmap to Successful Integration of Evidence at the Point of Care.

Authors:  Thomas McGinn
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2016-05-19

6.  PERC rule to exclude the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in emergency low-risk patients: study protocol for the PROPER randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Yonathan Freund; Alexandra Rousseau; France Guyot-Rousseau; Yann-Erick Claessens; Olivier Hugli; Olivier Sanchez; Tabassome Simon; Bruno Riou
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 2.279

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.