Refining risk in normotensive acute pulmonary embolism

K. Solverson, Christopher J. Humphreys, Zhiying Liang, P. Boiteau, Andre Freland, E. Herget, James Andruwchow, N. Fine, D. Helmersen, J. Weatherald
{"title":"Refining risk in normotensive acute pulmonary embolism","authors":"K. Solverson, Christopher J. Humphreys, Zhiying Liang, P. Boiteau, Andre Freland, E. Herget, James Andruwchow, N. Fine, D. Helmersen, J. Weatherald","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa3646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Normotensive acute pulmonary embolism (aPE) has a wide spectrum of outcomes. The best method to identify patients at higher-risk remains unclear. Aims and Objectives: 1) develop a unique prognostic model for adverse outcomes in normotensive aPE, 2) validate the Bova score in a North American population. Methods: This was a multi-centre retrospective cohort of all aPE admitted from emergency departments in Calgary, Canada between 2012-2017. Logistic regression models with bootstrapping for internal validation were used to predict the composite primary outcome of in-hospital death or hemodynamic decompensation. Results: 2067 patients with normotensive aPE were assessed. A primary outcome occurred in 32 patients (1.5%). Stratified by simplified pulmonary embolism severity index (sPESI), 21.2% were low-risk (0% event rate) and 78.8% were high-risk (2.0% event rate). The multivariable model in sPESI high-risk patients (n=1179) retained high-sensitivity troponin ≥50 pg/ml, CT right-left ventricular diameter ratio ≥1.5, systolic blood pressure Conclusions: Our novel risk score discriminated normotensive aPE patients at high risk of in-hospital adverse events better than the Bova score. Further validation of our score is warranted.","PeriodicalId":20797,"journal":{"name":"Pulmonary embolism","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulmonary embolism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa3646","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Normotensive acute pulmonary embolism (aPE) has a wide spectrum of outcomes. The best method to identify patients at higher-risk remains unclear. Aims and Objectives: 1) develop a unique prognostic model for adverse outcomes in normotensive aPE, 2) validate the Bova score in a North American population. Methods: This was a multi-centre retrospective cohort of all aPE admitted from emergency departments in Calgary, Canada between 2012-2017. Logistic regression models with bootstrapping for internal validation were used to predict the composite primary outcome of in-hospital death or hemodynamic decompensation. Results: 2067 patients with normotensive aPE were assessed. A primary outcome occurred in 32 patients (1.5%). Stratified by simplified pulmonary embolism severity index (sPESI), 21.2% were low-risk (0% event rate) and 78.8% were high-risk (2.0% event rate). The multivariable model in sPESI high-risk patients (n=1179) retained high-sensitivity troponin ≥50 pg/ml, CT right-left ventricular diameter ratio ≥1.5, systolic blood pressure Conclusions: Our novel risk score discriminated normotensive aPE patients at high risk of in-hospital adverse events better than the Bova score. Further validation of our score is warranted.
正常血压急性肺栓塞的改善风险
简介:常压急性肺栓塞(aPE)具有广泛的结局。鉴别高风险患者的最佳方法尚不清楚。目的和目的:1)为正常血压aPE患者的不良结局建立一个独特的预后模型;2)在北美人群中验证Bova评分。方法:这是一项多中心回顾性队列研究,纳入了2012-2017年加拿大卡尔加里急诊科收治的所有aPE。采用Logistic回归模型进行内部验证,预测院内死亡或血流动力学失代偿的复合主要结局。结果:对2067例血压正常的aPE患者进行了评估。32例(1.5%)患者出现主要结局。按简化肺栓塞严重程度指数(sPESI)分层,21.2%为低危(0%事件发生率),78.8%为高危(2.0%事件发生率)。sPESI高危患者(n=1179)的多变量模型保留了高敏感性肌钙蛋白≥50 pg/ml, CT左右心室直径比≥1.5,收缩压。结论:我们的新风险评分比Bova评分更好地区分了院内不良事件高风险的正常血压aPE患者。进一步验证我们的分数是有必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信