1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Rapid prediction of adverse outcomes for acute normotensive pulmonary embolism: derivation of the Calgary Acute Pulmonary Embolism score

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) has a wide spectrum of outcomes, but the best method to risk-stratify normotensive patients for adverse outcomes remains unclear.

          Methods

          A multicentre retrospective cohort study of acute PE patients admitted from emergency departments in Calgary, Canada, between 2012 and 2017 was used to develop a refined acute PE risk score. The composite primary outcome of in-hospital PE-related death or haemodynamic decompensation. The model was internally validated using bootstrapping and the prognostic value of the derived risk score was compared to the Bova score.

          Results

          Of 2067 patients with normotensive acute PE, the primary outcome (haemodynamic decompensation or PE-related death) occurred in 32 (1.5%) patients. In simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index high-risk patients (n=1498, 78%), a multivariable model used to predict the primary outcome retained computed tomography (CT) right–left ventricular diameter ratio ≥1.5, systolic blood pressure 90–100 mmHg, central pulmonary artery clot and heart rate ≥100 beats·min −1 with a C-statistic of 0.89 (95% CI 0.82–0.93). Three risk groups were derived using a weighted score (score, prevalence, primary outcome event rate): group 1 (0–3, 73.8%, 0.34%), group 2 (4–6, 17.6%, 5.8%), group 3 (7–9, 8.7%, 12.8%) with a C-statistic 0.85 (95% CI 0.78–0.91). In comparison the prevalence (primary outcome) by Bova risk stages (n=1179) were stage I 49.8% (0.2%); stage II 31.9% (2.7%); and stage III 18.4% (7.8%) with a C-statistic 0.80 (95% CI 0.74–0.86).

          Conclusions

          A simple four-variable risk score using clinical data immediately available after CT diagnosis of acute PE predicts in-hospital adverse outcomes. External validation of the Calgary Acute Pulmonary Embolism score is required.

          Abstract

          Derivation of a simple four-variable risk score that uses parameters available at the time of PE diagnosis to risk stratify acute normotensive PE patients, which may help clinicians better decide how to monitor and treat patients https://bit.ly/37PdyrM

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Index for rating diagnostic tests

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report.

            We update recommendations on 12 topics that were in the 9th edition of these guidelines, and address 3 new topics.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement.

              Prediction models are developed to aid health care providers in estimating the probability or risk that a specific disease or condition is present (diagnostic models) or that a specific event will occur in the future (prognostic models), to inform their decision making. However, the overwhelming evidence shows that the quality of reporting of prediction model studies is poor. Only with full and clear reporting of information on all aspects of a prediction model can risk of bias and potential usefulness of prediction models be adequately assessed. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) Initiative developed a set of recommendations for the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. This article describes how the TRIPOD Statement was developed. An extensive list of items based on a review of the literature was created, which was reduced after a Web-based survey and revised during a 3-day meeting in June 2011 with methodologists, health care professionals, and journal editors. The list was refined during several meetings of the steering group and in e-mail discussions with the wider group of TRIPOD contributors. The resulting TRIPOD Statement is a checklist of 22 items, deemed essential for transparent reporting of a prediction model study. The TRIPOD Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. The TRIPOD Statement is best used in conjunction with the TRIPOD explanation and elaboration document. To aid the editorial process and readers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission (also available at www.tripod-statement.org).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                ERJ Open Res
                ERJ Open Res
                ERJOR
                erjor
                ERJ Open Research
                European Respiratory Society
                2312-0541
                April 2021
                19 April 2021
                : 7
                : 2
                : 00879-2020
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Dept of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [2 ]Dept of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [3 ]Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [4 ]Dept of Emergency Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [5 ]Dept of Radiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [6 ]Section of Respirology, Dept of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                Author notes
                Jason Weatherald, Peter Lougheed Centre, 3500 26 Ave NE, Calgary, Alberta, T1Y 6J4, Canada. E-mail: jcweathe@ 123456ucalgary.ca
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9895-8908
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3356-5262
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3536-1792
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0615-4575
                Article
                00879-2020
                10.1183/23120541.00879-2020
                8053914
                2c76e318-fd1f-43a2-9c2d-91d8da13dde7
                Copyright ©The authors 2021

                This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org

                History
                : 24 November 2020
                : 18 February 2021
                Categories
                Original Articles
                Pulmonary Vascular Disease
                7

                Comments

                Comment on this article