A. Marin, Igor Požek, R. Erzen, P. M. Brguljan, M. Košnik
{"title":"应用肺疾病临床预测模型提高肺栓塞诊断率","authors":"A. Marin, Igor Požek, R. Erzen, P. M. Brguljan, M. Košnik","doi":"10.6016/338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose of the Study: Clinical prediction models\nhave been developed to assess the pre-test\nprobability for pulmonary embolism (PE). The\nWells model and the revised Geneva score are\nthe two most well studied. Our purpose was to\ncompare the two prediction models, and indentify\nthe frequent clinical findings of PE in patients\nadmitted to the University Clinic of Pulmonary\nand Allergic Diseases Golnik.\nMethods: In 100 random emergency department\npatients and hospital inpatients with\nsuspected PE and performed pulmonary CT\nangiography (CTPA) as the gold standard, a retrospective\nassessment of the clinical probability\nof PE by the Wells rule and the revised Geneva\nscore was made. ECG, D-dimer, NT-proBNP, arterial\nblood gas analysis, chest X-ray, CTPA and\n13 other clinical findings were analysed as well.\nResults: Average age was 65 years (SD 14.5), 39 %\nwere male. The overall prevalence of PE was\n33 %. The rates of PE in low, moderate, and high\nPE risk groups as determined according to the\nWells model and the revised Geneva score were\n3.7, 53,1, 100, and 14.3, 32.1, 83.3 %, respectively.\nROC analysis showed that the Wells model was\nstatistically more accurate than the Geneva score\nwith the area under the curve (AUC) in Wells\nmodel 0.85 (95 % CI 0.762–0.936) and in Geneva\nscore 0.73 (95 % CI 0.612–0.838). Sudden\ndyspnea, active malignancy, venous thromboembolism\n(VTE) history, estrogen therapy, deep\nvein thrombosis (DVT) signs, ECG changes and\nlower PaCO2 were significantly more frequent in\nPE group. All patients with PE had an increased\nconcentration of D-dimer, and no PE were diagnosed\nin the group of patients with normal\nD-dimer. CTPA was ordered in 17 % of patients\nwith low pre-test probability of PE according to\nWells criteria and normal D-dimer. Conclusions: The Wells model is more accurate\nthan the Geneva scoring system for the diagnosis\nof PE in patients admitted to a pulmonary\nclinic. Additional findings, such as sudden dyspnea,\nestrogen therapy, ECG changes and lower\nPaCO2, should always be incorporated in clinical\nassessment of PE. Adding the Wells algorithm to\nthe clinical pathway for PE management might\nslightly decrease the number of CTPA.","PeriodicalId":49350,"journal":{"name":"Zdravniski Vestnik-Slovenian Medical Journal","volume":"46 1","pages":"698-706"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving diagnostics of pulmonary embolism with clinical prediction models in a clinic of pulmonary diseases\",\"authors\":\"A. Marin, Igor Požek, R. Erzen, P. M. Brguljan, M. Košnik\",\"doi\":\"10.6016/338\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose of the Study: Clinical prediction models\\nhave been developed to assess the pre-test\\nprobability for pulmonary embolism (PE). The\\nWells model and the revised Geneva score are\\nthe two most well studied. Our purpose was to\\ncompare the two prediction models, and indentify\\nthe frequent clinical findings of PE in patients\\nadmitted to the University Clinic of Pulmonary\\nand Allergic Diseases Golnik.\\nMethods: In 100 random emergency department\\npatients and hospital inpatients with\\nsuspected PE and performed pulmonary CT\\nangiography (CTPA) as the gold standard, a retrospective\\nassessment of the clinical probability\\nof PE by the Wells rule and the revised Geneva\\nscore was made. ECG, D-dimer, NT-proBNP, arterial\\nblood gas analysis, chest X-ray, CTPA and\\n13 other clinical findings were analysed as well.\\nResults: Average age was 65 years (SD 14.5), 39 %\\nwere male. The overall prevalence of PE was\\n33 %. The rates of PE in low, moderate, and high\\nPE risk groups as determined according to the\\nWells model and the revised Geneva score were\\n3.7, 53,1, 100, and 14.3, 32.1, 83.3 %, respectively.\\nROC analysis showed that the Wells model was\\nstatistically more accurate than the Geneva score\\nwith the area under the curve (AUC) in Wells\\nmodel 0.85 (95 % CI 0.762–0.936) and in Geneva\\nscore 0.73 (95 % CI 0.612–0.838). Sudden\\ndyspnea, active malignancy, venous thromboembolism\\n(VTE) history, estrogen therapy, deep\\nvein thrombosis (DVT) signs, ECG changes and\\nlower PaCO2 were significantly more frequent in\\nPE group. All patients with PE had an increased\\nconcentration of D-dimer, and no PE were diagnosed\\nin the group of patients with normal\\nD-dimer. CTPA was ordered in 17 % of patients\\nwith low pre-test probability of PE according to\\nWells criteria and normal D-dimer. Conclusions: The Wells model is more accurate\\nthan the Geneva scoring system for the diagnosis\\nof PE in patients admitted to a pulmonary\\nclinic. Additional findings, such as sudden dyspnea,\\nestrogen therapy, ECG changes and lower\\nPaCO2, should always be incorporated in clinical\\nassessment of PE. Adding the Wells algorithm to\\nthe clinical pathway for PE management might\\nslightly decrease the number of CTPA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zdravniski Vestnik-Slovenian Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"698-706\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zdravniski Vestnik-Slovenian Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6016/338\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zdravniski Vestnik-Slovenian Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6016/338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究目的:已经建立了临床预测模型来评估肺栓塞(PE)的检测前概率。威尔斯模型和修订后的日内瓦分数是研究得最多的两个模型。我们的目的是比较两种预测模型,并确定在大学肺部和过敏性疾病诊所就诊的患者中PE的常见临床表现。方法:随机选取100例疑似PE的急诊科患者和医院住院患者,以行肺造影(CTPA)为金标准,采用Wells规则和修订Genevascore对PE的临床概率进行回顾性评价。并分析了心电图、d -二聚体、NT-proBNP、动脉血气分析、胸片、CTPA等13项临床表现。结果:平均年龄65岁(SD 14.5),男性占39%。PE的总患病率为33%。根据wells模型和修订后的Geneva评分,低、中、高PE风险组的PE发生率分别为3.7、53、1100和14.3%、32.1%和83.3%。ROC分析显示,Wells模型的曲线下面积(AUC)为0.85 (95% CI 0.762-0.936), Genevascore的AUC为0.73 (95% CI 0.612-0.838),在统计学上优于Geneva评分。pe组患者突发性呼吸困难、活动性恶性肿瘤、静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)史、雌激素治疗、深静脉血栓形成(DVT)征象、心电图改变及PaCO2降低的发生率显著高于pe组。所有PE患者的d -二聚体浓度均升高,正常组未诊断为PE。根据toWells标准和正常d -二聚体,17%的PE检测前概率较低的患者接受CTPA治疗。结论:在肺科门诊就诊的患者中,Wells模型比Geneva评分系统诊断PE更准确。其他发现,如突发性呼吸困难、雌激素治疗、心电图改变和paco2降低,应始终纳入PE的临床评估。将Wells算法添加到PE管理的临床路径中可能会略微减少CTPA的数量。
Improving diagnostics of pulmonary embolism with clinical prediction models in a clinic of pulmonary diseases
Purpose of the Study: Clinical prediction models
have been developed to assess the pre-test
probability for pulmonary embolism (PE). The
Wells model and the revised Geneva score are
the two most well studied. Our purpose was to
compare the two prediction models, and indentify
the frequent clinical findings of PE in patients
admitted to the University Clinic of Pulmonary
and Allergic Diseases Golnik.
Methods: In 100 random emergency department
patients and hospital inpatients with
suspected PE and performed pulmonary CT
angiography (CTPA) as the gold standard, a retrospective
assessment of the clinical probability
of PE by the Wells rule and the revised Geneva
score was made. ECG, D-dimer, NT-proBNP, arterial
blood gas analysis, chest X-ray, CTPA and
13 other clinical findings were analysed as well.
Results: Average age was 65 years (SD 14.5), 39 %
were male. The overall prevalence of PE was
33 %. The rates of PE in low, moderate, and high
PE risk groups as determined according to the
Wells model and the revised Geneva score were
3.7, 53,1, 100, and 14.3, 32.1, 83.3 %, respectively.
ROC analysis showed that the Wells model was
statistically more accurate than the Geneva score
with the area under the curve (AUC) in Wells
model 0.85 (95 % CI 0.762–0.936) and in Geneva
score 0.73 (95 % CI 0.612–0.838). Sudden
dyspnea, active malignancy, venous thromboembolism
(VTE) history, estrogen therapy, deep
vein thrombosis (DVT) signs, ECG changes and
lower PaCO2 were significantly more frequent in
PE group. All patients with PE had an increased
concentration of D-dimer, and no PE were diagnosed
in the group of patients with normal
D-dimer. CTPA was ordered in 17 % of patients
with low pre-test probability of PE according to
Wells criteria and normal D-dimer. Conclusions: The Wells model is more accurate
than the Geneva scoring system for the diagnosis
of PE in patients admitted to a pulmonary
clinic. Additional findings, such as sudden dyspnea,
estrogen therapy, ECG changes and lower
PaCO2, should always be incorporated in clinical
assessment of PE. Adding the Wells algorithm to
the clinical pathway for PE management might
slightly decrease the number of CTPA.