Comparing predictive performance of pulmonary embolism risk stratification tools for acute clinical deterioration

Author:

Weekes Anthony J.1,Raper Jaron D.1,Esener Dasia2,Davison Jillian3,Boyd Jeremy S.4,Kelly Christopher5,Nomura Jason T.6,Thomas Alyssa M.1,Lupez Kathryn1,Cox Carly A.1,Ockerse Patrick M.5,Leech Stephen3,Johnson Jakea4,Abrams Eric2,Murphy Kathleen6,O'Connell Nathaniel S.7

Affiliation:

1. Department of Emergency Medicine Atrium Health's Carolinas Medical Center Charlotte North Carolina USA

2. Department of Emergency Medicine Kaiser Permanente San Diego California USA

3. Department of Emergency Medicine Orlando Health Orlando Florida USA

4. Department of Emergency Medicine Vanderbilt University Medical Center Nashville Tennessee USA

5. Department of Emergency Medicine University of Utah Health Salt Lake City Utah USA

6. Department of Emergency Medicine Christiana Care Newark Delaware USA

7. Department of Biostatistics and Data Science Wake Forest University School of Medicine Winston‐Salem North Carolina USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesExisting pulmonary embolism (PE) risk scores were developed to predict death within weeks, but not more proximate adverse events. We determined the ability of 3 PE risk stratification tools (simplified pulmonary embolism severity index [sPESI], 2019 European Society of Cardiology guidelines [ESC], and PE short‐term clinical outcomes risk estimation [PE‐SCORE]) to predict 5‐day clinical deterioration after emergency department (ED) diagnosis of PE.MethodsWe analyzed data from six EDs on ED patients with confirmed PE. Clinical deterioration was defined as death, respiratory failure, cardiac arrest, new dysrhythmia, sustained hypotension requiring vasopressors or volume resuscitation, or escalated intervention within 5 days of PE diagnosis. We determined sensitivity and specificity of sPESI, ESC, and PE‐SCORE for predicting clinical deterioration.ResultsOf 1569 patients, 24.5% had clinical deterioration within 5 days. sPESI, ESC, and PE‐SCORE classifications were low‐risk in 558 (35.6%), 167 (10.6%), and 309 (19.6%), respectively. Sensitivities of sPESI, ESC, and PE‐SCORE for clinical deterioration were 81.8 (78, 85.7), 98.7 (97.6, 99.8), and 96.1 (94.2, 98), respectively. Specificities of sPESI, ESC, and PE‐SCORE for clinical deterioration were 41.2 (38.4, 44), 13.7 (11.7, 15.6), and 24.8 (22.4, 27.3). Areas under the curve were 61.5 (59.1, 63.9), 56.2 (55.1, 57.3), and 60.5 (58.9, 62.0). Negative predictive values were 87.5 (84.7, 90.2), 97 (94.4, 99.6), and 95.1 (92.7, 97.5).ConclusionsESC and PE‐SCORE were better than sPESI for detecting clinical deterioration within 5 days after PE diagnosis.

Funder

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Emergency 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