ArticleMedical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre2021
The Positive Rate of Pulmonary Embolism by CT Pulmonary Angiography Is High in an Emergency Department, Even in Low-Risk or Young Patients.
Article in Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- CT Imaging Findings of Pulmonary Artery Stenosis: A Pictorial Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Article
- Assessment of the Utilization of Validated Diagnostic Predictive Tools and D-Dimer in the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study from a Public Hospital in New York City.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Prediction of venous thromboembolism with machine learning techniques in young-middle-aged inpatients.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe clinical presentation of pulmonary embolism (PE) can be various and misleading. We analyzed patients with suspicion of PE and subsequently performed computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in an emergency department of Internal Medicine, focusing on patient groups in which PE might be underestimated in the emergency setting, such as young patients and patients with low clinical probability. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn 2016 and 2017, all patients receiving a CTPA for investigation of PE were retrospectively evaluated for clinical parameters (age, symptoms, and vital parameters) and D-dimers. The Wells score was calculated.
resultsCTPA was performed in 323 patients (158 female and 165 male; mean age 62 years). The leading symptoms for admission were dyspnea or chest pain; 62% showed intermediate or high risk for PE, calculated by applying the Wells score. In 123 (38%) of all patients, a PE was proved and pathologic age-adjusted D-dimers were found in 97.6%. Thirty of 121 (25%) patients with low risk according to Wells score had a PE. Deep vein thrombosis was verified in 67/123 (55%) patients; 43% (15/35) of all suspicions for PE in patients <40 years were positive with 4/15 (26%), showing a central PE. Younger patients (<40 years) with PE presented more often with tachycardia or tachypnea and chest pain or dyspnea than elderly patients with PE.
conclusionCTPA frequently proves a PE in patients with suspicion of PE in an emergency department of Internal Medicine. If PE is suspected and CTPA performed accordingly, the presence of PE is quite common even in low-risk patient groups (Wells score) or in young patients <40 years with chest pain or dyspnea.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.