Comparison of wells and revised Geneva rule to assess pretest probability of pulmonary embolism in high-risk hospitalized elderly adults

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Volumn 63, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1091-1097

  Di Marca, Salvatore ^a   Cilia, Chiara ^a   Campagna, Andrea ^a   D'Arrigo, Graziella ^b   Elhafeez, Samar Abd ^b,c   Tripepi, Giovanni ^b   Puccia, Giuseppe ^a   Pisano, Marcella ^a   Mastrosimone, Gianluca ^a   Terranova, Valentina ^a   Cardella, Antonella ^a   Buonacera, Agata ^a   Stancanelli, Benedetta ^a   Zoccali, Carmine ^b   Malatino, Lorenzo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CATANIA   (Italy)

^b BIANCHI MELACRINO MORELLI HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^c High Institute of Public Health Egypt   (Egypt)

Author keywords

D dimer; elderly adults; pulmonary embolism; revised Geneva score; Wells score

Indexed keywords

D DIMER;

AGED; AGED HOSPITAL PATIENT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; GERIATRIC ASSESSMENT; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; ITALY; LUNG ANGIOGRAPHY; LUNG EMBOLISM; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RESPIRATORY TRACT DISEASE ASSESSMENT; REVISED GENEVA SCORE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WELLS SCORE; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PULMONARY EMBOLISM; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AREA UNDER CURVE; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; EMERGENCY SERVICE, HOSPITAL; HUMANS; ITALY; PATIENT ADMISSION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PULMONARY EMBOLISM; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 84931564095     PISSN: 00028614     EISSN: 15325415     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jgs.13459     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Horlander KT, Mannino DM, Leeper KV,. Pulmonary embolism mortality in the United States, 1979-1998: An analysis using multiple-cause mortality data. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 1711-1717.
2. Goldhaber SZ, Visani L, De Rosa M,. Acute pulmonary embolism: Clinical outcomes in the International Cooperative Pulmonary Embolism Registry (ICOPER). Lancet 1999; 353: 1386-1389.
3. Nijkeuter M, Söhne M, Tick LW, et al., The natural course of hemodynamically stable pulmonary embolism: Clinical outcome and risk factors in a large prospective cohort study. Chest 2007; 131: 517-523.
4. Stein PD, Matta F, Musani MH, et al., Silent pulmonary embolism in patients with deep venous thrombosis: A systematic review. Am J Med 2010; 123: 426-431.
5. Le Gal G, Testuz A, Righini M, et al., Reproduction of chest pain by palpation: Diagnostic accuracy in suspected pulmonary embolism. BMJ 2005; 330: 452-453.
6. Torbicki A, van Beek EJR, Charbonnier B, et al., Guidelines on diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Task Force on Pulmonary Embolism, European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2000; 21: 1301-1336.
7. Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, et al., Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: Increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED D-dimer. Thromb Haemost 2000; 83: 416-420.
8. Moores LK, King CS, Holley AB,. Current approach to the diagnosis of acute nonmassive pulmonary embolism. Chest 2011; 140: 509-518.
9. Fedullo PF, Tapson VF,. Clinical practice. The evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 1247-1256.
10. Chopra N, Doddamreddy P, Grewal H, et al., An elevated D-dimer value: A burden on our patients and hospitals. Int J Gen Med 2012; 5: 87-92.
11. Torbicki A, Perrier A, Konstantinides S, et al., Guidelines on diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Task Force on Pulmonary Embolism, European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2008; 29: 2276-2315.
12. Agnelli G, Beccattini C,. Acute pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 266-274.
13. Le Gal G, Righini M, Roy PM, et al., Prediction of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: The revised Geneva score. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144: 165-171.
14. Ceriani E, Combescure C, Le Gal G, et al., Clinical prediction rules for pulmonary embolism: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8: 957-970.
15. van Belle A, Buller HR, Huisman MV, et al., Effectiveness of managing suspected pulmonary embolism using an algorithm combining clinical probability, D-dimer testing, and computed tomography. JAMA 2006; 295: 172-179.
16. Kearon C, Ginsberg JS, Douketis J, et al., An evaluation of D-dimer in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144: 812-821.
17. Stein PD, Fowler SE, Goodman LR, et al., Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 2317-2327.
18. Ost D, Khanna D, Shah R, et al., Impact of spiral computed tomography on the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in a community hospital setting. Respiration 2004; 71: 450-457.
19. Penaloza A, Melot C, Motte S,. Comparison of the Wells score with the simplified revised Geneva score for assessing pretest probability of pulmonary embolism. Thromb Res 2011; 127: 8-14.
20. Wong DD, Ramaseshan G, Mendelson RM,. Comparison of the Wells and revised Geneva score for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: An Australian experience. Intern Med J 2011; 41: 258-263.
21. Salaun PY, Couturaud F, Le Duc-Pennec A, et al., Noninvasive diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Chest 2011; 139: 1294-1298.
22. Ouellette DR,. Pulmonary Embolism, 2008 [on-line]. Available at http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic490.htm Accessed December 1, 2010.
23. Matsushita K, Selvin E, Bash LD, et al., Risk implications of the New CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation compared with the MDRD Study equation for estimated GFR: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. Am J Kidney Dis 2010; 55: 648-659.
24. Matsushita K, Mahmoodi BK, Woodward M, et al., Chronic Kidney Disease Prognosis Consortium. Comparison of risk prediction using the CKD-EPI equation and the MDRD study equation for estimated glomerular filtration rate. JAMA 2012; 307: 1941-1951.
25. Youden WJ,. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 1950; 3: 32-35.
26. McDonald JH,. Handbook of Biological Statistics, 2nd Ed. Baltimore, MD: Sparky House Publishing, 2009.
27. Penaloza A, Verschuren F, Meyer G, et al., Comparison of the unstructured clinician gestalt, the Wells score, and the revised Geneva score to estimate pretest probability for suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Emerg Med 2013; 62: 117-124.
28. Klok FA, Kruisman E, Spaan J, et al., Comparison of the revised Geneva score with the Wells rule for assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost 2008; 6: 40-44.
29. Chagnon I, Bounameaux H, Aujesky D, et al., Comparison of two clinical prediction rules and implicit assessment among patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Am J Med 2002; 113: 269-275.
30. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL,. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837-845.
31. Pepe MS, Janes H, Longton G, et al., Limitations of the odds ratio in gauging the performance of a diagnostic, prognostic, or screening marker. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159: 882-890.
32. Douma RA, Mos IC, Erkens PM, et al., Performance of 4 clinical decision rules in the diagnostic management of acute pulmonary embolism: A prospective cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2011; 154: 709-718.
33. Ye YP, Li YY, Chen J, et al., The diagnostic values of Wells score and modified Geneva score for pretesting acute pulmonary embolism: A prospective study. Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi 2012; 51: 626-629.
34. Guo XJ, Liu M, Guo YM, et al., A comparison of the predictive values of three clinical scoring systems for suspected acute pulmonary embolism based on multidetector CT angiography. Zhonghua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi 2009; 32: 119-123.
35. Calisir C, Yavas US, Ozkan IR, et al., Performance of the Wells and revised Geneva scores for predicting pulmonary embolism. Eur J Emerg Med 2009; 16: 49-52.
36. Miniati M, Bottai M, Monti S,. Comparison of 3 clinical models for predicting the probability of pulmonary embolism. Medicine 2005; 84: 107-114.
37. Beardsell A, Bell S, Robinson S, et al., MCEM Part A: MCQs. London, UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press, 2009.
38. Klok FA, Zidane M, Djurabi RK, et al., The physician's estimation 'alternative diagnosis is less likely than pulmonary embolism' in the Wells rule is dependent on the presence of other required items. J Thromb Haemost 2008; 99: 244.
39. Moores LK, Collen JF, Woods KM, et al., Practical utility of clinical prediction rules for suspected acute pulmonary embolism in a large academic institution. Thromb Res 2004; 113: 1-6.
40. Perrier A, Desmarais S, Miron MJ, et al., Non-invasive diagnosis of venous thromboembolism in outpatients. Lancet 1999; 353: 190-195.
41. Kobberøe Søgaard K, Schmidt M, Pedersen L, et al., 30-year mortality following venous thromboembolism: A population-based cohort study. Circulation 2014; 12: 1449-1454.
42. Righini M, Van Es J, Den Exter PL, et al., Age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels to rule out pulmonary embolism: The ADJUST-PE study. JAMA 2014; 311: 1117-1124.