Suppr超能文献

简化用于评估肺栓塞临床可能性的修订版日内瓦评分

Simplification of the revised Geneva score for assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism.

作者信息

Klok Frederikus A, Mos Inge C M, Nijkeuter Mathilde, Righini Marc, Perrier Arnaud, Le Gal Grégoire, Huisman Menno V

机构信息

Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of General Internal Medicine-Endocrinology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Arch Intern Med. 2008 Oct 27;168(19):2131-6. doi: 10.1001/archinte.168.19.2131.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The revised Geneva score is a fully standardized clinical decision rule (CDR) in the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). The variables of the decision rule have different weights, which could lead to miscalculations in an acute setting. We have validated a simplified version of the revised Geneva score.

METHODS

Data from 1049 patients from 2 large prospective diagnostic trials that included patients with suspected PE were used and combined to validate the simplified revised Geneva score. We constructed the simplified CDR by attributing 1 point to each item of the original CDR and compared the diagnostic accuracy of the 2 versions by a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. We also assessed the clinical utility of the simplified CDR by evaluating the safety of ruling out PE on the basis of the combination of either a low-intermediate clinical probability (using a 3-level scheme) or a "PE unlikely" assessment (using a dichotomized rule) with a normal result on a highly sensitive D-dimer test.

RESULTS

The complete study population had an overall prevalence of venous thromboembolism of 23%. The diagnostic accuracy between the 2 CDRs did not differ (area under the curve for the revised Geneva score was 0.75 [95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.78] vs 0.74 [0.70-0.77] for the simplified revised Geneva score). During 3 months of follow-up, no patient with a combination of either a low (0%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0%-1.7%) or intermediate (0%; 0.0%-2.8%) clinical probability, or a "PE unlikely" assessment (0%; 0.0%-1.2%) with the simplified score and a normal result of a D-dimer test was diagnosed as having venous thromboembolism.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that simplification of the revised Geneva score does not lead to a decrease in diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility, which should be confirmed in a prospective study.

摘要

背景

修订后的日内瓦评分是用于疑似肺栓塞(PE)患者诊断检查的完全标准化临床决策规则(CDR)。该决策规则的变量具有不同权重,这可能导致在急性情况下计算错误。我们已经验证了修订后日内瓦评分的简化版本。

方法

使用来自2项大型前瞻性诊断试验的1049例患者的数据,这些试验纳入了疑似PE患者,并将其合并以验证简化后的修订日内瓦评分。我们通过给原始CDR的每个项目赋予1分来构建简化的CDR,并通过受试者工作特征曲线分析比较两个版本的诊断准确性。我们还通过评估基于低-中度临床概率(使用三级方案)或“PE可能性不大”评估(使用二分法规则)与高敏D-二聚体检测结果正常相结合来排除PE的安全性,评估简化CDR的临床实用性。

结果

整个研究人群中静脉血栓栓塞的总体患病率为23%。两个CDR之间的诊断准确性没有差异(修订后日内瓦评分的曲线下面积为0.75[95%置信区间,0.71-0.78],而简化后的修订日内瓦评分为0.74[0.70-0.77])。在3个月的随访期间,没有患者同时具有低(0%;95%置信区间,0.0%-1.7%)或中度(0%;0.0%-2.8%)临床概率,或简化评分“PE可能性不大”评估(0%;0.0%-1.2%)且D-二聚体检测结果正常被诊断为静脉血栓栓塞。

结论

本研究表明,简化修订后的日内瓦评分不会导致诊断准确性和临床实用性降低,这一点应在前瞻性研究中得到证实。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验