Performance of 4 Clinical Decision Rules in the Diagnostic Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism
Open Access
- 7 June 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American College of Physicians in Annals of Internal Medicine
- Vol. 154 (11), 709-718
- https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-154-11-201106070-00002
Abstract
Several clinical decision rules (CDRs) are available to exclude acute pulmonary embolism (PE), but they have not been directly compared. To directly compare the performance of 4 CDRs (Wells rule, revised Geneva score, simplified Wells rule, and simplified revised Geneva score) in combination with d-dimer testing to exclude PE. Prospective cohort study. 7 hospitals in the Netherlands. 807 consecutive patients with suspected acute PE. The clinical probability of PE was assessed by using a computer program that calculated all CDRs and indicated the next diagnostic step. Results of the CDRs and d-dimer tests guided clinical care. Results of the CDRs were compared with the prevalence of PE identified by computed tomography or venous thromboembolism at 3-month follow-up. Prevalence of PE was 23%. The proportion of patients categorized as PE-unlikely ranged from 62% (simplified Wells rule) to 72% (Wells rule). Combined with a normal d-dimer result, the CDRs excluded PE in 22% to 24% of patients. The total failure rates of the CDR and d-dimer combinations were similar (1 failure, 0.5% to 0.6% [upper-limit 95% CI, 2.9% to 3.1%]). Even though 30% of patients had discordant CDR outcomes, PE was not detected in any patient with discordant CDRs and a normal d-dimer result. Management was based on a combination of decision rules and d-dimer testing rather than only 1 CDR combined with d-dimer testing. All 4 CDRs show similar performance for exclusion of acute PE in combination with a normal d-dimer result. This prospective validation indicates that the simplified scores may be used in clinical practice. Academic Medical Center, VU University Medical Center, Rijnstate Hospital, Leiden University Medical Center, Maastricht University Medical Center, Erasmus Medical Center, and Maasstad Hospital.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of the Wells and Revised Geneva Scores for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: an Australian experienceInternal Medicine Journal, 2011
- Clinical prediction rules for pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysisJournal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, 2010
- A Computerized Handheld Decision-Support System to Improve Pulmonary Embolism DiagnosisAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2009
- Performance of the Wells and Revised Geneva scores for predicting pulmonary embolismEuropean Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2009
- Validity and clinical utility of the simplified Wells rule for assessing clinical probability for the exclusion of pulmonary embolismThrombosis and Haemostasis, 2009
- The Importance of Clinical Probability Assessment in Interpreting a Normal d-Dimer in Patients With Suspected Pulmonary EmbolismSocial psychiatry. Sozialpsychiatrie. Psychiatrie sociale, 2008
- Further validation and simplification of the Wells clinical decision rule in pulmonary embolismThrombosis and Haemostasis, 2008
- Faculty Opinions recommendation of Prediction of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: the revised Geneva score.Published by H1 Connect ,2006
- Prediction of Pulmonary Embolism in the Emergency Department: The Revised Geneva ScoreAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2006
- Appropriateness of Diagnostic Management and Outcomes of Suspected Pulmonary EmbolismAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2006