scholarly journals Validez del Pulmonary Embolism Rule-Out Criteria (PERC) para descartar embolia pulmonar en pacientes con bajo riesgo a gran altitud

2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alirio Bastidas Goyes ◽  
Luis Felipe Velasco ◽  
Estefan Ramos-Isaza ◽  
Laura María Rodríguez-Jiménez ◽  
Maria Lygia Mondragón-Bravo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Rule Out

Objetivos: validar el rendimiento diagnóstico del puntaje PERC para descartar embolia pulmonar en pacientes de bajo riesgo a gran altitud (>2500 msnm). Metodología: estudio de corte transversal con análisis de prueba diagnóstica en pacientes mayores de 18 años con sospecha diagnóstica de embolia pulmonar al ingreso o durante la hospitalización llevado a toma de angiotomografía de tórax desde agosto de 2009 hasta enero de 2020 en un centro de tercer nivel ubicado en la Sabana de Bogotá, se evaluó el rendimiento del puntaje PERC (Embolism Rule-Out Criteria) calculado con una SatO2<95% y una SatO2<90% en pacientes con diferentes niveles de riesgo según los puntajes de Wells, Ginebra y Pisa para embolia pulmonar. Resultados: mil ochenta y siete ingresaron al ánalisis final, 42% con EP. Se encontró para los pacientes clasificados de bajo riesgo por el puntaje de Wells un ACOR para el PERC calculado con SatO2<95% de 0.56 (IC-95%:0.50-0.62) (p=0.049), y para el PERC calculado con SatO2<90% de 0.60 (IC-95%:0.54-0.66) (p=0.002), el ACOR para sujetos clasificados de bajo riesgo por el puntaje de Ginebra con un PERC calculado con SatO2<95% fue de: 0.53 (IC-95%:0.45-0.60) (p=0.459) y para un PERC calculado con SatO2<90% fue de: 0.55 (IC-95%:0.47-0.62) (P=0.218), el ACOR para sujetos clasificados con menos de 10% de probabilidad para EP por el puntaje de Pisa con un PERC calculado con SatO2<95% fue de: 0.54 (IC-95%:0.44-0.64)(p=0.422) y para un PERC calculado con SatO2<90% fue de: 0.56 (IC-95%:0.46-0.66)(p=0.236). Conclusiones: el puntaje PERC calculado con una saturación de oxígeno <90% tiene un rendimiento diagnóstico similar al puntaje PERC calculado con una saturación de oxígeno <95% para descartar EP en pacientes clasificados en bajo riesgo con puntaje de Wells a gran altitud (>2500 msnm).

D-Dimer and CT Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism

2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
DAMIAN MCNAMARA
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out

D-Dimer Determination to Exclude Pulmonary Embolism: a Two-Step Approach Using Latex Assay as a Screening Tool

1994 ◽  
Vol 72 (01) ◽  
pp. 089-091 ◽  
Author(s):  
P de Moerloose ◽  
Ph Minazio ◽  
G Reber ◽  
A Perrier ◽  
H Bounameaux
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Elisa Assay ◽  
Elisa Technique ◽  
Diagnostic Step ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out ◽  
Latex Test

SummaryD-dimer (DD), when measured by a quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), is a valuable test to exclude venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, DD ELISA technique is not appropriate for emergency use and the available agglutination latex assays are not sensitive enough to be used as an alternative to rule out the diagnosis of VTE. Latex assays could still be used as screening tests. We tested this hypothesis by comparing DD levels measured by ELISA and latex assays in 334 patients suspected of pulmonary embolism. All but one patient with a positive (DD ≥500 ng/ml) latex assay had DD levels higher than 500 ng/ml with the ELISA assay. Accordingly, ELISA technique could be restricted to patients with a negative result in latex assay. This two-step approach would have spared about 50% of ELISA in our cohort. In conclusion, our data indicate that a latex test can be used as a first diagnostic step to rule out pulmonary embolism provided a negative result is confirmed by ELISA and the performance of the latex assay used has been assessed properly.

Evidence for Age-Adjusted D-Dimer to Rule out Pulmonary Embolism: An Institutional Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 154 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S5-S5
Author(s):  
Ridin Balakrishnan ◽  
Daniel Casa ◽  
Morayma Reyes Gil
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
False Positive ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
Moderate Risk ◽  
Older Population ◽  
Statistical Measures ◽  
Positive Rate ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out

Abstract The diagnostic approach for ruling out suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE) in the ED setting includes several tests: ultrasound, plasma d-dimer assays, ventilation-perfusion scans and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Importantly, a pretest probability scoring algorithm is highly recommended to triage high risk cases while also preventing unnecessary testing and harm to low/moderate risk patients. The d-dimer assay (both ELISA and immunoturbidometric) has been shown to be extremely sensitive to rule out PE in conjunction with clinical probability. In particularly, d-dimer testing is recommended for low/moderate risk patients, in whom a negative d-dimer essentially rules out PE sparing these patients from CTPA radiation exposure, longer hospital stay and anticoagulation. However, an unspecific increase in fibrin-degradation related products has been seen with increase in age, resulting in higher false positive rate in the older population. This study analyzed patient visits to the ED of a large academic institution for five years and looked at the relationship between d-dimer values, age and CTPA results to better understand the value of age-adjusted d-dimer cut-offs in ruling out PE in the older population. A total of 7660 ED visits had a CTPA done to rule out PE; out of which 1875 cases had a d-dimer done in conjunction with the CT and 5875 had only CTPA done. Out of the 1875 cases, 1591 had positive d-dimer results (&gt;0.50 µg/ml (FEU)), of which 910 (57%) were from patients older than or equal to fifty years of age. In these older patients, 779 (86%) had a negative CT result. The following were the statistical measures of the d-dimer test before adjusting for age: sensitivity (98%), specificity (12%); negative predictive value (98%) and false positive rate (88%). After adjusting for age in people older than 50 years (d-dimer cut off = age/100), 138 patients eventually turned out to be d-dimer negative and every case but four had a CT result that was also negative for a PE. The four cases included two non-diagnostic results and two with subacute/chronic/subsegmental PE on imaging. None of these four patients were prescribed anticoagulation. The statistical measures of the d-dimer test after adjusting for age showed: sensitivity (96%), specificity (20%); negative predictive value (98%) and a decrease in the false positive rate (80%). Therefore, imaging could have been potentially avoided in 138/779 (18%) of the patients who were part of this older population and had eventual negative or not clinically significant findings on CTPA if age-adjusted d-dimers were used. This data very strongly advocates for the clinical usefulness of an age-adjusted cut-off of d-dimer to rule out PE.

scholarly journals Use of pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) in the emergency department

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. s1-s1
Author(s):  
Richard Siau ◽  
Steven Young ◽  
Melissa Blyth ◽  
Kirsty Dickson-Jardine
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Rule Out

Triple Rule-Out CT in Patients with Suspicion of Acute Pulmonary Embolism

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 708-717 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Schertler ◽  
Thomas Frauenfelder ◽  
Paul Stolzmann ◽  
Hans Scheffel ◽  
Lotus Desbiolles ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Acute Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Triple Rule Out ◽  
Rule Out
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document