We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Pearls and Myths in the Evaluation of Patients with Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism.
American Journal of Medicine 2019 June
Significant improvement has been achieved in diagnostic accuracy, validation of probability scores, and standardized treatment algorithms for patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism. These developments have provided the tools for a safe and cost-effective management for most of these patients. In our experience, however, the presence of medical myths and ongoing controversies seem to hinder the implementation of these tools in everyday clinical practice. This review provides a selection of such dilemmas and controversies and discusses the published evidence beyond them. By doing so, we try to overcome these dilemmas and suggest pragmatic approaches guided by the available evidence and current guidelines.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
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