We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Safety of multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography to exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with a likely pretest clinical probability.
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis : JTH 2017 August
Essentials Safety of computed tomography (CTPA) to exclude pulmonary embolism (PE) in all patients is debated. We analysed the outcome of PE-likely outpatients left untreated after negative CTPA alone. The 3-month venous thromboembolic risk in these patients was very low (0.6%; 95% CI 0.2-2.3). Multidetector CTPA alone safely excludes PE in patients with likely clinical probability.
SUMMARY: Background In patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) classified as having a likely or high pretest clinical probability, the need to perform additional testing after a negative multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) finding remains a matter of debate. Objectives To assess the safety of excluding PE by CTPA without additional imaging in patients with a likely pretest probability of PE. Patients/Methods We retrospectively analyzed patients included in two multicenter management outcome studies that assessed diagnostic algorithms for PE diagnosis. Results Two thousand five hundred and twenty-two outpatients with suspected PE were available for analysis. Of these 2522 patients, 845 had a likely clinical probability as assessed by use of the simplified revised Geneva score. Of all of these patients, 314 had the diagnosis of PE excluded by a negative CTPA finding alone without additional testing, and were left without anticoagulant treatment and followed up for 3 months. Two patients presented with a venous thromboembolism (VTE) during follow-up. Therefore, the 3-month VTE risk in likely-probability patients after a negative CTPA finding alone was 2/314 (0.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-2.3%). Conclusions In outpatients with suspected PE and a likely clinical probability as assessed by use of the simplified revised Geneva score, CTPA alone seems to be able to safely exclude PE, with a low 3-month VTE rate, which is similar to the VTE rate following the gold standard, i.e. pulmonary angiography.
SUMMARY: Background In patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) classified as having a likely or high pretest clinical probability, the need to perform additional testing after a negative multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) finding remains a matter of debate. Objectives To assess the safety of excluding PE by CTPA without additional imaging in patients with a likely pretest probability of PE. Patients/Methods We retrospectively analyzed patients included in two multicenter management outcome studies that assessed diagnostic algorithms for PE diagnosis. Results Two thousand five hundred and twenty-two outpatients with suspected PE were available for analysis. Of these 2522 patients, 845 had a likely clinical probability as assessed by use of the simplified revised Geneva score. Of all of these patients, 314 had the diagnosis of PE excluded by a negative CTPA finding alone without additional testing, and were left without anticoagulant treatment and followed up for 3 months. Two patients presented with a venous thromboembolism (VTE) during follow-up. Therefore, the 3-month VTE risk in likely-probability patients after a negative CTPA finding alone was 2/314 (0.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-2.3%). Conclusions In outpatients with suspected PE and a likely clinical probability as assessed by use of the simplified revised Geneva score, CTPA alone seems to be able to safely exclude PE, with a low 3-month VTE rate, which is similar to the VTE rate following the gold standard, i.e. pulmonary angiography.
Full text links
Related Resources
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
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