• Acad Emerg Med · Sep 2018

    Multicenter Study Observational Study

    Multicenter Evaluation of the YEARS Criteria in Emergency Department Patients Evaluated for Pulmonary Embolism.

    • Christopher Kabrhel, Astrid Van Hylckama Vlieg, Alona Muzikanski, Adam Singer, Gregory J Fermann, Samuel Francis, Alex Limkakeng, Ann Marie Chang, Nicholas Giordano, and Blair Parry.
    • Center for Vascular Emergencies, Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
    • Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Sep 1; 25 (9): 987-994.

    BackgroundIt may be possible to safely rule out pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with low pretest probability (PTP) using a higher than standard D-dimer threshold. The YEARS criteria, which include three questions from the Wells PE score to identify low-PTP patients and a variable D-dimer threshold, was recently shown to decrease the need for imaging to rule out PE by 14% in a multicenter study in the Netherlands. However, the YEARS approach has not been studied in the United States.MethodsThis study was a prospective, observational study of consecutive adult patients evaluated for PE in 17 U.S. emergency departments. Prior to diagnostic testing, we collected the YEARS criteria: "Does the patient have clinical signs or symptoms of DVT?" "Does the patient have hemoptysis?" "Are alternative diagnoses less likely than PE?" with YEARS (+) being any "yes" response. A negative D-dimer was <1000 mg/dL for YEARS (-) patients and <500 mg/dL for YEARS (+) patients. We calculated test characteristics and used Fisher's exact test to compare proportions of patients who would have been referred for imaging and patients who would have had PE "missed."ResultsOf 1,789 patients, 84 (4%) had PE, 1,134 (63%) were female, 1,038 (58%) were white, and mean (±SD) age was 48 (±16) years. Using the standard D-dimer threshold, 940 (53%) would not have had imaging, with two (0.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02%-0.60%) missed PE. Using YEARS adjustment, 1,204 (67%, 95% CI = 65%-69%) would not have been referred for imaging, with six (0.5%, 95% CI = 0.18%-1.1%) missed PE, and using "alternative diagnoses less likely than PE" adjustment, 1,237 (69%, 95% CI = 67%-71%) would not have had imaging with six (0.49%, 95% CI = 0.18%-1.05%) missed PE. Sensitivity was 97.6% (95% CI = 91.7%-99.7%) for the standard threshold and 92.9% (95% CI = 85%-97%) for both adjusted thresholds. Negative predictive value (NPV) was nearly 100% for all approaches.ConclusionsD-dimer adjustment based on PTP may result in a reduced need for imaging to evaluate possible PE, with some additional missed PE but no decrease in NPV.© 2018 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.