Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38368878›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental emergency medicine2024

Contemporary approaches to pulmonary embolism diagnosis: a clinical review.

Dorian Teissandier, Mélanie Roussel, Héloise Bannelier, Yonathan Freund, Pierre Catoire

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Dorian TeissandierDepartment of Emergency, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France.
Mélanie RousselDepartment of Emergency, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rouen, University of Rouen Normandy, Rouen, France.
Héloise BannelierDepartment of Emergency, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France.
Yonathan FreundDepartment of Emergency, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France.
Pierre CatoireDepartment of Emergency, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optimal diagnosis strategy for pulmonary embolism (PE) in the emergency department (ED) remains complex. This review summarizes PE diagnosis with clinical presentation, decision rules and investigations for acute PE. This review was performed using studies published between January 1, 2010, and September 1, 2023. PE should be considered in ED in patients with chest pain, shortness of breath, syncope or signs of deep veinous thrombosis. Definitive diagnosis of PE relies on thoracic imaging, with the use of chest tomographic pulmonary angiogram or ventilation-perfusion lung scintigraphy. To limit the continuous increased use of chest imaging, the clinical probability should be the first step for PE workup. The pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) can rule out PE at this stage. If not, for low or intermediate probability, several clinical decision rules have been validated, either by ruling out PE on clinical signs, or by raising D-dimer thresholds (YEARS or PEGeD [Pulmonary Embolism Graduated D-Dimer] criteria) or by combination of these different rules. It is recommended that patients with a high clinical probability of PE should undergo chest imaging without the need for D-dimer testing. The PE diagnostic approach can be tailored in specific populations such as pregnant, younger, COVID-19, or cancer patients. PE diagnosis workup illustrates the complexity of modern probabilistic-based approaches of decision-making in medicine. It is recommended to use a Bayesian approach with the evaluation of clinical probability, then order D-dimer if the PERC rule is positive, then adapt the D-dimer threshold for ordering chest imaging using clinical decision rules.

Indexed as

Clinical decision rulesD-dimer pulmonary embolism rule-out criteriaPEGeD (Pulmonary Embolism Graduated D-Dimer)Pulmonary embolism

Identifiers

PMID38368878
PMCPMC11237265

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.