Literature DB >> 26032745

Comparison of Wells and Revised Geneva Rule to Assess Pretest Probability of Pulmonary Embolism in High-Risk Hospitalized Elderly Adults.

Salvatore Di Marca1, Chiara Cilia1, Andrea Campagna1, Graziella D'Arrigo2, Samar Abd ElHafeez2,3, Giovanni Tripepi2, Giuseppe Puccia1, Marcella Pisano1, Gianluca Mastrosimone1, Valentina Terranova1, Antonella Cardella1, Agata Buonacera1, Benedetta Stancanelli1, Carmine Zoccali2, Lorenzo Malatino1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the diagnostic power for pulmonary embolism (PE) of Wells and revised Geneva scores in two independent cohorts (training and validation groups) of elderly adults hospitalized in a non-emergency department.
DESIGN: Prospective clinical study, January 2011 to January 2013.
SETTING: Unit of Internal Medicine inpatients, University of Catania, Italy. PARTICIPANTS: Elderly adults (mean age 76 ± 12), presenting with dyspnea or chest pain and with high clinical probability of PE or D-dimer values greater than 500 ng/mL (N = 203), were enrolled and consecutively assigned to a training (n = 101) or a validation (n = 102) group. The clinical probability of PE was assessed using Wells and revised Geneva scores. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical examination, D-dimer test, and multidetector computed angiotomography were performed in all participants. The accuracy of the scores was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analyses.
RESULTS: PE was confirmed in 46 participants (23%) (24 training group, 22 validation group). In the training group, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.85-0.98) for the Wells score and 0.69 (95% CI = 0.56-0.82) for the revised Geneva score (P < .001). These results were confirmed in the validation group (P < .05). The positive (LR+) and negative likelihood ratios (LR-) (two indices combining sensitivity and specificity) of the Wells score were superior to those of the revised Geneva score in the training (LR+, 7.90 vs 1.34; LR-, 0.23 vs 0.66) and validation (LR+, 13.5 vs 1.46; LR-, 0.47 vs 0.54) groups.
CONCLUSION: In high-risk elderly hospitalized adults, the Wells score is more accurate than the revised Geneva score for diagnosing PE.
© 2015, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2015, The American Geriatrics Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  D-dimer; Wells score; elderly adults; pulmonary embolism; revised Geneva score

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26032745     DOI: 10.1111/jgs.13459

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc        ISSN: 0002-8614            Impact factor:   5.562


  4 in total

1.  Age-dependent diagnostic accuracy of clinical scoring systems and D-dimer levels in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA).

Authors:  Sebastian N Nagel; Ingo G Steffen; Stefan Schwartz; Bernd Hamm; Thomas Elgeti
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-02-19       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Negative D-dimer testing excludes pulmonary embolism in non-high risk patients in the emergency department.

Authors:  John B Harringa; Rebecca L Bracken; Scott K Nagle; Mark L Schiebler; Michael S Pulia; James E Svenson; Michael D Repplinger
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2017-01-24

3.  Diagnostic management of inpatients with a positive D-dimer test: developing a new clinical decision-making rule for pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Min Lei; Chang Liu; Zhuang Luo; Zhibo Xu; Youfan Jiang; Jiachen Lin; Chu Wang; Depeng Jiang
Journal:  Pulm Circ       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 3.017

4.  Current use of D-dimer for the exclusion of venous thrombosis in hospitalized patients.

Authors:  Nitzan Karny-Epstein; Ran Abuhasira; Alon Grossman
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-20       Impact factor: 4.996

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.