Suppr超能文献

对急性肺栓塞急诊科患者进行风险分层:简化版肺栓塞严重程度指数的表现与原版一样好吗?

Risk stratifying emergency department patients with acute pulmonary embolism: Does the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index perform as well as the original?

作者信息

Vinson David R, Ballard Dustin W, Mark Dustin G, Huang Jie, Reed Mary E, Rauchwerger Adina S, Wang David H, Lin James S, Kene Mamata V, Pleshakov Tamara S, Sax Dana K, Sax Jordan M, McLachlan D Ian, Yamin Cyrus K, Swap Clifford J, Iskin Hilary R, Vemula Ridhima, Fleming Bethany S, Elms Andrew R, Aujesky Drahomir

机构信息

The Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, California, United States; Kaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, Oakland, California, United States; Department of Emergency Medicine, Kaiser Permanente Sacramento Medical Center, Sacramento, California, United States.

The Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, California, United States; Kaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, Oakland, California, United States; Department of Emergency Medicine, Kaiser Permanente San Rafael Medical Center, San Rafael, California, United States.

出版信息

Thromb Res. 2016 Dec;148:1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2016.09.023. Epub 2016 Sep 24.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) is a validated prognostic score to estimate the 30-day mortality of emergency department (ED) patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). A simplified version (sPESI) was derived but has not been as well studied in the U.S. We sought to validate both indices in a community hospital setting in the U.S. and compare their performance in predicting 30-day all-cause mortality and classification of cases into low-risk and higher-risk categories.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included adults with acute objectively confirmed PE from 1/2013 to 4/2015 across 21 community EDs. We evaluated the misclassification rate of the sPESI compared with the PESI. We assessed accuracy of both indices with regard to 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Among 3006 cases of acute PE, the 30-day all-cause mortality rate was 4.4%. The sPESI performed as well as the PESI in identifying low-risk patients: both had similar sensitivities, negative predictive values, and negative likelihood ratios. The sPESI, however, classified a smaller proportion of patients as low risk than the PESI (27.5% vs. 41.0%), but with similar low-risk mortality rates (<1%). Compared with the PESI, the sPESI overclassified 443 low-risk patients (14.7%) as higher risk, yet their 30-day mortality was 0.7%. The sPESI underclassified 100 higher-risk patients (3.3%) as low risk who also had a low mortality rate (1.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Both indices identified patients with PE who were at low risk for 30-day mortality. The sPESI, however, misclassified a significant number of low-mortality patients as higher risk, which could lead to unnecessary hospitalizations.

摘要

引言

肺栓塞严重程度指数(PESI)是一种经过验证的预后评分系统,用于评估急诊科(ED)急性肺栓塞(PE)患者的30天死亡率。简化版(sPESI)已被推导出来,但在美国尚未得到充分研究。我们试图在美国一家社区医院环境中验证这两个指数,并比较它们在预测30天全因死亡率以及将病例分类为低风险和高风险类别方面的表现。

材料与方法

这项回顾性队列研究纳入了2013年1月至2015年4月期间来自21个社区急诊科的急性客观确诊为PE的成人患者。我们评估了sPESI与PESI相比的错误分类率。我们评估了这两个指数在30天死亡率方面的准确性。

结果

在3006例急性PE病例中,30天全因死亡率为4.4%。sPESI在识别低风险患者方面与PESI表现相当:两者具有相似的敏感性、阴性预测值和阴性似然比。然而,sPESI将低风险患者分类的比例低于PESI(27.5%对41.0%),但低风险死亡率相似(<1%)。与PESI相比,sPESI将443例低风险患者(14.7%)过度分类为高风险,但其30天死亡率为0.7%。sPESI将100例高风险患者(3.3%)错误分类为低风险,这些患者的死亡率也较低(1.0%)。

结论

两个指数都能识别出30天死亡率低风险的PE患者。然而,sPESI将大量低死亡率患者错误分类为高风险,这可能导致不必要的住院治疗。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验