Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria vs D-dimer testing in low-risk patients for pulmonary embolism: a retrospective study - 28/05/14
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.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
☆ | This article has been presented at the 2013 research forum of the ACEP scientific assembly, Seattle, WA. |
☆☆ | Author Contribution Statement: YF, PR and BR conceived the study and designed the trial. JB, AA, NN, CVC and DP collected the data. CD provided biochemical expertise. YF and BR undertook statistical analysis. YF drafted the manuscript. BR, PR and DP provided extensive reviewing and substantial revisions. |
★ | The authors would like to thank Dr EC Baker, Barts Health NHS trust, for extensive review and support. |
Vol 32 - N° 6
P. 609-613 - juin 2014 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?