Risk scoring models fail to predict pulmonary embolism in trauma patients - 16/09/21
, Emily Leede
, Lawrence H. Brown
, Pedro G. Teixeira
, Jayson D. Aydelotte
, Tatiana C. Cardenas
, Thomas B. Coopwood
, Marc D. Trust
, Sadia Ali
, Carlos V.R. Brown ⁎ 
Abstract |
Background |
We aimed to identify risk factors and risk scoring models to help identify post-traumatic pulmonary embolisms (PE).
Methods |
We performed a retrospective review (2014–2019) of all adult trauma patients admitted to our Level I trauma center that received a CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) for a suspected PE. A systematic literature search found eleven risk scoring models, all of which were applied to these patients. Scores of patients with and without PE were compared.
Results |
Of the 235 trauma patients that received CTPA, 31 (13%) showed a PE. No risk scoring model had both a sensitivity and specificity above 90%. The Wells Score had the highest area under the curve (0.65). After logistic regression, no risk scoring model variables were independently associated with PE.
Conclusions |
In trauma patients with clinically suspected PE, clinical variables and current risk scoring models do not adequately differentiate patients with and without PE.
Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.Highlights |
• | No pulmonary embolism risk scoring model had both high sensitivity and specificity. |
• | No signs or symptoms were independently associated with pulmonary embolism. |
• | Area under the curve was low for all pulmonary embolism risk scoring models. |
• | No risk scoring model was effective as a rule-out tool for pulmonary embolism. |
Keywords : Trauma, Pulmonary, Embolism, Prediction, Score, Risk
Mappa
Vol 222 - N° 4
P. 855-860 - ottobre 2021 Ritorno al numeroBenvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.
Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?
