Touhami Omar, Marzouk Sofiene Ben, Bennasr Laidi, Touaibia Maha, Souli Iheb, Felfel Mohamed Amine, Kehila Mehdi, Channoufi Mohamed Badis, Magherbi Hayen El
"C" Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tunis Maternity and Neonatology Center, Tunis El Manar University, Tunisia.
Anesthesiology and Reanimation Department, Tunis Maternity and Neonatology Center, Tunis El Manar University, Tunisia.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018 Feb;221:166-171. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.049. Epub 2017 Dec 28.
To evaluate and to compare the predictive accuracy of the Wells score and the revised Geneva scores for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the pregnant and postpartum population.
All pregnant or post-partum patients with a suspected PE and for whom a diagnostic imaging testing was performed (VQ scintigraphy or computed tomography pulmonary angiography) over a 3-year period were included in the study. The Wells and Revised Geneva Scores were calculated on the same cohort of patients and dichotomized into low and intermediate/high probability groups. The sensitivities and specificities were calculated. Overall accuracy was determined using receiver operator characteristic curve analysis.
A total of 103 patients were included. The overall prevalence of PE was 26.2% (27/103). Using the Wells Score, the prevalence of patients with PE in the low, intermediate and high probability categories was 20.5%, 43.5% and 50% respectively. Using the Revised Geneva Score, the prevalence of patients with PE in the low, intermediate and high probability categories was 17%, 36.2 and 33.3% respectively. In low risk groups of the Wells score and the simplified revised Geneva score the prevalence of PE was not statistically significantly different: respectively: 20.5% and 17.5% (p = 0,232). The agreement on clinical assessment using the Wells score and using the revised Geneva score was weak (κ coefficient = 0.154). In total, 26 (25.2%) patients were classified differently using the 2 scores. There was no significant difference in the overall accuracies of the Wells (0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.79) and Revised Geneva Scores (0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.76) as determined by the area under the ROC curves (P = 0.628). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of the Wells score and the revised Geneva score were respectively: 40.7%, 81.5%, 44%, 79.4% and 62.9%, 59.2%, 35.4%, 81.8%.
CONCLUSION(S): The Wells score and the revised Geneva seems not to be valuable in the pregnant and post partum population. A specific risk score of PE for pregnant and postpartum population is needed to reduce the rate of unnecessary imaging studies, especially in this specific population were the use of radiation and contrast agent is problematic.
评估并比较Wells评分和修订的Geneva评分对诊断妊娠及产后人群肺栓塞的预测准确性。
纳入在3年期间内所有疑似肺栓塞且接受了诊断性影像学检查(通气/灌注闪烁扫描或计算机断层扫描肺动脉造影)的妊娠或产后患者。对同一组患者计算Wells评分和修订的Geneva评分,并将其分为低、中/高概率组。计算敏感性和特异性。使用受试者工作特征曲线分析确定总体准确性。
共纳入103例患者。肺栓塞的总体患病率为26.2%(27/103)。使用Wells评分,低、中、高概率类别中肺栓塞患者的患病率分别为20.5%、43.5%和50%。使用修订的Geneva评分,低、中、高概率类别中肺栓塞患者的患病率分别为17%、36.2%和33.3%。在Wells评分和简化修订的Geneva评分的低风险组中,肺栓塞的患病率无统计学显著差异:分别为20.5%和17.5%(p = 0.232)。使用Wells评分和修订的Geneva评分进行临床评估的一致性较弱(κ系数 = 0.154)。总共26例(25.2%)患者使用这两种评分分类不同。根据ROC曲线下面积确定,Wells评分(0.67,95% CI 0.54 - 0.79)和修订的Geneva评分(0.64,95% CI 0.52 - 0.76)的总体准确性无显著差异(P = 0.628)。Wells评分和修订的Geneva评分的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为:40.7%、81.5%、44%、79.4%和62.9%、59.2%、35.4%、81.8%。
Wells评分和修订的Geneva评分在妊娠及产后人群中似乎没有价值。需要针对妊娠及产后人群制定特定的肺栓塞风险评分,以降低不必要的影像学检查率,尤其是在这个使用辐射和造影剂存在问题的特定人群中。