EVALUATION STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Prospective multicenter evaluation of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria.

BACKGROUND: Over-investigation of low-risk patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) represents a growing problem. The combination of gestalt estimate of low suspicion for PE, together with the PE rule-out criteria [PERC(-): age < 50 years, pulse < 100 beats min(-1), SaO(2) >or= 95%, no hemoptysis, no estrogen use, no surgery/trauma requiring hospitalization within 4 weeks, no prior venous thromboembolism (VTE), and no unilateral leg swelling], may reduce speculative testing for PE. We hypothesized that low suspicion and PERC(-) would predict a post-test probability of VTE(+) or death below 2.0%.

METHODS: We enrolled outpatients with suspected PE in 13 emergency departments. Clinicians completed a 72-field, web-based data form at the time of test order. Low suspicion required a gestalt pretest probability estimate of <15%. The main outcome was the composite of image-proven VTE(+) or death from any cause within 45 days.

RESULTS: We enrolled 8138 patients, 85% of whom had a chief complaint of either dyspnea or chest pain. Clinicians reported a low suspicion for PE, together with PERC(-), in 1666 patients (20%). At initial testing and within 45 days, 561 patients (6.9%, 95% confidence interval 6.5-7.6) were VTE(+), and 56 others died. Among the low suspicion and PERC(-) patients, 15 were VTE(+) and one other patient died, yielding a false-negative rate of 16/1666 (1.0%, 0.6-1.6%). As a diagnostic test, low suspicion and PERC(-) had a sensitivity of 97.4% (95.8-98.5%) and a specificity of 21.9% (21.0-22.9%).

CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gestalt estimate of low suspicion for PE and PERC(-) reduces the probability of VTE to below 2% in about 20% of outpatients with suspected PE.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app