Safety of the pulmonary embolism rule‐out criteria rule: Findings from the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbolica venosa (RIETE) registry

Author:

Truong Perrine1ORCID,Mazzolai Lucia2,Font Carme3,Ciammaichella Maurizio4,González‐Martínez José5,Tufano Antonella6,Gavín‐Sebastián Olga7,Le Mao Raphael8,Monreal Manuel910,Hugli Olivier1,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Emergency Medicine Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne Switzerland

2. Department of Angiology Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne Switzerland

3. Department of Medical Oncology Hospital Clínic Barcelona Spain

4. Department of Emergency Internal Medicine Ospedale St.John Rome Italy

5. Department of Internal Medicine Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Déu, Fundació Althaia, Manresa Barcelona Spain

6. Regional Reference Centre Federico II University Hospital Naples Italy

7. Department of Haematology Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa Zaragoza Spain

8. Department of Internal Medicine CHRU Brest Brest France

9. Faculty of Health Sciences UCAM—Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia Murcia Spain

10. CIBER Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES) Madrid Spain

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe diagnostic strategy for pulmonary embolism (PE) includes a D‐dimer test when PE probability is low or intermediate, but false‐positive D‐dimer results are frequent and can result in an unnecessary computed tomography pulmonary angiogram. The PE rule‐out criteria (PERC) rule excludes PE without D‐dimer testing when pretest probability is <15%. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of the PERC rule strategy in patients included in the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbolica venosa (RIETE) registry.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study used data from the RIETE registry, an ongoing, international prospective registry of patients with objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism. The primary outcome was the failure rate of the PERC strategy, represented by the proportion of PERC‐negative (PERC‐N) patients with a PE included in the registry. Secondary outcomes were a comparison of the clinical characteristics, treatment strategy, and outcome of PERC‐N versus PERC‐positive (PERC‐P) patients at 3 months.ResultsFrom 2001 to 2021, a total of 49,793 patients with acute PE were enrolled in the RIETE registry. We included 48,903 in the final analysis after exclusion of 890 patients with an undetermined PERC status. Only 346 patients were PERC‐N with a failure rate of 0.7% (95% confidence interval 0.6%–0.8%). PERC‐N patients presented more frequently with chest pain but less often with dyspnea, syncope, or hypotension. They also had subsegmental or segmental PE more frequently, were more often treated with direct oral anticoagulants, and received mechanical or pharmacological thrombolysis less often. In addition, PERC‐N patients had a lower incidence of recurrent deep vein thrombosis, major bleeding, and death attributed to PE during the 3‐month follow‐up.ConclusionsA low failure rate of the PERC rule was observed in the RIETE registry, thus supporting its use to safely identify patients with an unlikely probability of PE.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Emergency Medicine,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3