• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

2009年至2020年间,在哥伦比亚一家三级医疗机构收治的18岁及以上疑似肺栓塞的成年患者中,日内瓦临床量表对肺栓塞诊断预测的诊断准确性:一项回顾性队列研究。

Diagnostic accuracy of the Geneva clinical scale for diagnostic prediction of pulmonary embolism in adults aged 18 and older admitted between 2009 and 2020 with suspected pulmonary embolism at a Third-Level Institution in Colombia: A retrospective cohort study.

作者信息

López-Vega Cristian, Pérez-Garzón Michel, Ortiz-García-Herreros Leonora, Bastidas-Goyes Alirio, Aramendiz-Narvaez Manuel, Ramos-Isaza Estefan, Robayo-Amortegui Henry

机构信息

Intensive Care, Clínica Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia.

Department of Critical Care Medicine, Extracorporeal Life Support Unit (USVEC), Fundación Clínica Shaio, Bogotá D.C., Colombia.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2025 Feb 28;104(9):e41603. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000041603.

DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000041603
PMID:40020148
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11875587/
Abstract

To assess the overall applicability of the Geneva scale for diagnosing pulmonary embolism in adults aged 18 and older. A retrospective cohort study with diagnostic test analysis was conducted on patients in the emergency department or hospitalized between 2009 and 2020 with suspected pulmonary embolism at a Third-Level Institution in Colombia. Local study. The original and simplified Geneva scores were applied to 1237 subjects aged 18 and older with suspected pulmonary embolism and compared with confirmatory results from pulmonary angiography. All necessary variables for constructing the original and simplified Geneva rules were recorded, and calculations for sensitivity (S), specificity (E), likelihood ratios, and receiver operating characteristic curves were performed. The Geneva original score exhibited an S, E, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the curve of 60%, 54%, 1.3, 0.728, and 0.506, respectively. The simplified Geneva score showed 59%, 57%, 1.4, 0.7, and 0.546 for S, E, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the curve, respectively. The use of the original or simplified Geneva score in our population may not be useful for a diagnostic approach to pulmonary embolism. Both scales demonstrate almost negligible discriminatory capacity, necessitating the evaluation of other standardized clinical decision rules to assess the diagnosis and pretest probability of pulmonary thromboembolism.

摘要

评估日内瓦量表在诊断18岁及以上成年人肺栓塞方面的整体适用性。对2009年至2020年间在哥伦比亚一家三级医疗机构急诊科或住院的疑似肺栓塞患者进行了一项带有诊断试验分析的回顾性队列研究。本地研究。将原始版和简化版日内瓦评分应用于1237名18岁及以上的疑似肺栓塞患者,并与肺血管造影的确诊结果进行比较。记录构建原始版和简化版日内瓦规则所需的所有变量,并进行敏感性(S)、特异性(E)、似然比和受试者工作特征曲线的计算。日内瓦原始评分的敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比、阴性似然比和曲线下面积分别为60%、54%、1.3、0.728和0.506。简化版日内瓦评分的敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比、阴性似然比和曲线下面积分别为59%、57%、1.4、0.7和0.546。在我们的人群中使用原始版或简化版日内瓦评分可能对肺栓塞的诊断方法没有帮助。两种量表的鉴别能力几乎可以忽略不计,因此有必要评估其他标准化临床决策规则,以评估肺血栓栓塞症的诊断和验前概率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/79d6/11875587/69850a0b7e54/medi-104-e41603-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/79d6/11875587/6343d3f9ba2f/medi-104-e41603-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/79d6/11875587/69850a0b7e54/medi-104-e41603-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/79d6/11875587/6343d3f9ba2f/medi-104-e41603-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/79d6/11875587/69850a0b7e54/medi-104-e41603-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Diagnostic accuracy of the Geneva clinical scale for diagnostic prediction of pulmonary embolism in adults aged 18 and older admitted between 2009 and 2020 with suspected pulmonary embolism at a Third-Level Institution in Colombia: A retrospective cohort study.2009年至2020年间,在哥伦比亚一家三级医疗机构收治的18岁及以上疑似肺栓塞的成年患者中,日内瓦临床量表对肺栓塞诊断预测的诊断准确性:一项回顾性队列研究。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2025 Feb 28;104(9):e41603. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000041603.
2
The Legend score synthesizes Wells, PERC, Geneva, D-dimer and predicts acute pulmonary embolism prior to imaging tests.传奇评分综合了韦尔斯评分、PERC评分、日内瓦评分、D-二聚体,并在影像学检查之前预测急性肺栓塞。
Pulmonology. 2025 Dec 31;31(1):2416828. doi: 10.1016/j.pulmoe.2023.10.002. Epub 2024 Oct 24.
3
Comparison of two clinical prediction rules and implicit assessment among patients with suspected pulmonary embolism.疑似肺栓塞患者中两种临床预测规则及隐性评估的比较。
Am J Med. 2002 Sep;113(4):269-75. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(02)01212-3.
4
Comparison of Wells and Revised Geneva Rule to Assess Pretest Probability of Pulmonary Embolism in High-Risk Hospitalized Elderly Adults.比较Wells评分与修订版日内瓦评分以评估高危住院老年成人肺栓塞的预测试概率
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015 Jun;63(6):1091-7. doi: 10.1111/jgs.13459. Epub 2015 Jun 1.
5
Validity of four clinical prediction scores for pulmonary embolism in a sub-Saharan African setting: a protocol for a Cameroonian multicentre cross-sectional study.四种肺栓塞临床预测评分在撒哈拉以南非洲地区的有效性:喀麦隆多中心横断面研究方案
BMJ Open. 2019 Oct 15;9(10):e031322. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031322.
6
Wells and Geneva Scores Are Not Reliable Predictors of Pulmonary Embolism in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Study.危重症患者 Wells 和 Geneva 评分不能可靠预测肺栓塞:一项回顾性研究。
J Intensive Care Med. 2020 Oct;35(10):1112-1117. doi: 10.1177/0885066618816280. Epub 2018 Dec 16.
7
Importance of Wells score and Geneva score for the evaluation of patients suspected of pulmonary embolism.Wells评分和Geneva评分在疑似肺栓塞患者评估中的重要性。
In Vivo. 2015 Mar-Apr;29(2):269-72.
8
[The diagnostic values of Wells score and modified Geneva score for pretesting acute pulmonary embolism: a prospective study].[Wells评分和改良Geneva评分在急性肺栓塞预测试中的诊断价值:一项前瞻性研究]
Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi. 2012 Aug;51(8):626-9.
9
A comparative analysis of the diagnostic performances of four clinical probability models for acute pulmonary embolism in a sub-Saharan African population: a cross-sectional study.撒哈拉以南非洲人群中四种急性肺栓塞临床概率模型诊断性能的比较分析:一项横断面研究。
BMC Pulm Med. 2019 Dec 27;19(1):263. doi: 10.1186/s12890-019-1037-x.
10
Assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism: prospective validation of the simplified Geneva score.评估肺栓塞的临床可能性:简化的日内瓦评分的前瞻性验证。
J Thromb Haemost. 2017 Sep;15(9):1764-1769. doi: 10.1111/jth.13770. Epub 2017 Aug 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessing the clinical probability of pulmonary embolism during pregnancy: The Pregnancy-Adapted Geneva (PAG) score.评估妊娠期肺栓塞的临床可能性:妊娠期改良日内瓦(PAG)评分。
J Thromb Haemost. 2021 Dec;19(12):3044-3050. doi: 10.1111/jth.15521. Epub 2021 Sep 21.
2
Pregnancy-Adapted YEARS Algorithm for Diagnosis of Suspected Pulmonary Embolism.妊娠适应 YEARS 算法在疑似肺栓塞诊断中的应用。
N Engl J Med. 2019 Mar 21;380(12):1139-1149. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1813865.
3
Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism During Pregnancy: A Multicenter Prospective Management Outcome Study.
妊娠期肺栓塞的诊断:多中心前瞻性管理结局研究。
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Dec 4;169(11):766-773. doi: 10.7326/M18-1670. Epub 2018 Oct 23.
4
Are the Wells Score and the Revised Geneva Score valuable for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in pregnancy?Wells评分和修订的Geneva评分对妊娠期肺栓塞的诊断有价值吗?
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018 Feb;221:166-171. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.049. Epub 2017 Dec 28.
5
National consensus on the diagnosis, risk stratification and treatment of patients with pulmonary embolism: An update.
Arch Bronconeumol. 2016 Feb;52(2):61-2. doi: 10.1016/j.arbres.2015.07.002. Epub 2015 Aug 10.
6
Values of the Wells and revised Geneva scores combined with D-dimer in diagnosing elderly pulmonary embolism patients.Wells评分和修订的Geneva评分联合D-二聚体在老年肺栓塞患者诊断中的价值。
Chin Med J (Engl). 2015 Apr 20;128(8):1052-7. doi: 10.4103/0366-6999.155085.
7
2014 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism.2014年欧洲心脏病学会急性肺栓塞诊断和管理指南
Eur Heart J. 2014 Nov 14;35(43):3033-69, 3069a-3069k. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu283. Epub 2014 Aug 29.
8
National Consensus on the Diagnosis, Risk Stratification and Treatment of Patients with Pulmonary Embolism. Spanish Society of Pneumology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR). Society Española Internal Medicine (SEMI). Spanish Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SETH). Spanish Society of Cardiology (ESC). Spanish Society of Medicine Accident and Emergency (SEMES). Spanish Society of Angiology and Surgery Vascular (SEACV).《肺栓塞患者诊断、风险分层与治疗的全国共识》。西班牙肺病与胸外科协会(SEPAR)、西班牙内科协会(SEMI)、西班牙血栓与止血协会(SETH)、西班牙心脏病学会(ESC)、西班牙急诊医学协会(SEMES)、西班牙血管病学与血管外科学会(SEACV)
Arch Bronconeumol. 2013 Dec;49(12):534-47. doi: 10.1016/j.arbres.2013.07.008. Epub 2013 Sep 14.
9
Comparison of the unstructured clinician gestalt, the wells score, and the revised Geneva score to estimate pretest probability for suspected pulmonary embolism.比较非结构化临床医生的整体印象、Wells评分和修订后的日内瓦评分,以评估疑似肺栓塞的验前概率。
Ann Emerg Med. 2013 Aug;62(2):117-124.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.11.002. Epub 2013 Feb 21.
10
Performance of 4 clinical decision rules in the diagnostic management of acute pulmonary embolism: a prospective cohort study.4 种临床决策规则在急性肺栓塞诊断管理中的表现:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jun 7;154(11):709-18. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-11-201106070-00002.