Adherence to risk-assessment protocols to guide computed tomography pulmonary angiography in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism

Author:

Kauppi Juha Matias1,Airaksinen K E Juhani2,Saha Juuso3,Bondfolk Anton3,Pouru Jussi-Pekka3,Purola Petra3,Jaakkola Samuli2,Lehtonen Jarmo1,Vasankari Tuija2ORCID,Juonala Markus45ORCID,Kiviniemi Tuomas2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Emergency Clinic, Turku University Hospital, Savitehtaankatu 1, 20540 Turku, Finland

2. Heart Centre, Turku University Hospital, 20521 Turku, Finland

3. University of Turku, Turku FI-20014, Finland

4. Department of Medicine, University of Turku, FI-20521, Finland

5. Division of Medicine, Turku University Hospital, Turku FI-20521, Finland

Abstract

Abstract Aims The use of computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in the detection of pulmonary embolism (PE) has considerably increased due developing technology and better availability of imaging. The underuse of pre-test probability scores and overuse of CTPA has been previously reported. We sought to investigate the indications for CTPA at a University Hospital emergency clinic and seek for factors eliciting the potential overuse of CTPA. Methods and results Altogether 1001 patients were retrospectively collected and analysed from the medical records using a structured case report form. PE was diagnosed in 222/1001 (22.2%) of patients. Patients with PE had more often prior PE/deep vein thrombosis, bleeding/thrombotic diathesis and less often asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, or decompensated heart failure. Patients were divided into three groups based on Wells PE risk-stratification score and two groups based on the revised Geneva score. A total of 9/382 (2.4%), 166/527 (31.5%), and 47/92 (52.2%) patients had PE in the CTPA in the low, intermediate, and high pre-test likelihood groups according to Wells score, and 200/955 (20.9%) and 22/46 (47.8%) patients had PE in the CTPA in the low-intermediate and the high pre-test likelihood groups according to the revised Geneva score, respectively. D-dimer was only measured from 568/909 (62.5%) and 597/955 (62.5%) patients who were either in the low or the intermediate-risk group according to Wells score and the revised Geneva score. Noteworthy, 105/1001 (10.5%) and 107/1001 (10.7%) of the CTPAs were inappropriately ordered according to the Wells score and the revised Geneva score. Altogether 168/1001 (16.8%) could theoretically be avoided. Conclusions This study highlights scant utilization of guideline-recommended risk-stratification tools in CTPA use at the emergency department.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Health Policy

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