Original, simplified, and modified pulmonary embolism severity indices in risk stratification of pulmonary embolism

IF 1 Q4 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Egyptian Journal of Bronchology Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI:10.4103/ejb.ejb_68_19
Maha Yousif, S. Hussein
{"title":"Original, simplified, and modified pulmonary embolism severity indices in risk stratification of pulmonary embolism","authors":"Maha Yousif, S. Hussein","doi":"10.4103/ejb.ejb_68_19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially fatal disease. Prognostic assessment is needed for proper management. Several prognostic models have been proposed. Aim The aim was to validate the original pulmonary embolism severity index (o-PESI) with its simplified version (s-PESI) and modified version (m-PESI) as predictors of in-hospital mortality and homeostatic morbidities (nonlethal repeated venous thromboembolism, and/or nonlethal serious hemorrhage) in patients with PE. Patients and methods Patients proved to have acute PE admitted to Menoufia and Cairo University Hospitals between March 2017 and March 2019 were included in the study. The o-PESI, s-PESI, and m-PESI were calculated for each patient. In-hospital mortality, homeostatic morbidities, and major adverse events (mortality and homeostatic morbidities) were registered. Results One hundred and two patients were recruited. In-hospital mortality rate was 13.7%, morbidity rate was 21.6%, whereas major adverse events rate was 31%. The s-PESI classified 31.4% of patients as low risk, and none of them had in-hospital mortality. The frequencies of major adverse events in the low-risk groups were 31.2, 9.1, and 75% for o-PESI, s-PESI, and m-PESI, respectively. Difference between adverse events and non-adverse events groups was significant when s-PESI was applied (P=0.008). The s-PESI had the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value in detecting mortality, morbidity, and major adverse events compared with o-PESI and m-PESI. The area under the curve for s-PESI was significantly above the other two indices (area under the curve=0.78, P=0.04). Conclusion In addition to its easy application, the s-PESI has a preferably superior prognostic accuracy than o-PESI and m-PESI in prognostication of low-risk patients with acute PE.","PeriodicalId":34128,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Bronchology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Bronchology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ejb.ejb_68_19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially fatal disease. Prognostic assessment is needed for proper management. Several prognostic models have been proposed. Aim The aim was to validate the original pulmonary embolism severity index (o-PESI) with its simplified version (s-PESI) and modified version (m-PESI) as predictors of in-hospital mortality and homeostatic morbidities (nonlethal repeated venous thromboembolism, and/or nonlethal serious hemorrhage) in patients with PE. Patients and methods Patients proved to have acute PE admitted to Menoufia and Cairo University Hospitals between March 2017 and March 2019 were included in the study. The o-PESI, s-PESI, and m-PESI were calculated for each patient. In-hospital mortality, homeostatic morbidities, and major adverse events (mortality and homeostatic morbidities) were registered. Results One hundred and two patients were recruited. In-hospital mortality rate was 13.7%, morbidity rate was 21.6%, whereas major adverse events rate was 31%. The s-PESI classified 31.4% of patients as low risk, and none of them had in-hospital mortality. The frequencies of major adverse events in the low-risk groups were 31.2, 9.1, and 75% for o-PESI, s-PESI, and m-PESI, respectively. Difference between adverse events and non-adverse events groups was significant when s-PESI was applied (P=0.008). The s-PESI had the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value in detecting mortality, morbidity, and major adverse events compared with o-PESI and m-PESI. The area under the curve for s-PESI was significantly above the other two indices (area under the curve=0.78, P=0.04). Conclusion In addition to its easy application, the s-PESI has a preferably superior prognostic accuracy than o-PESI and m-PESI in prognostication of low-risk patients with acute PE.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
原始的、简化的和改进的肺栓塞严重程度指标在肺栓塞危险分层中的应用
背景:急性肺栓塞(PE)是一种潜在的致命疾病。预后评估是正确治疗的必要条件。已经提出了几种预测模型。目的是验证原始肺栓塞严重程度指数(o-PESI)及其简化版本(s-PESI)和修改版本(m-PESI)作为PE患者住院死亡率和体内平衡发病率(非致死性反复静脉血栓栓塞和/或非致死性严重出血)的预测因子。患者和方法纳入2017年3月至2019年3月期间在Menoufia和开罗大学医院住院的经证实患有急性PE的患者。计算每位患者的o-PESI、s-PESI和m-PESI。记录了住院死亡率、体内平衡发病率和主要不良事件(死亡率和体内平衡发病率)。结果共纳入102例患者。住院死亡率为13.7%,发病率为21.6%,严重不良事件发生率为31%。s-PESI将31.4%的患者归为低危患者,且均无院内死亡。低危组中o-PESI、s-PESI和m-PESI的主要不良事件发生率分别为31.2%、9.1和75%。应用s-PESI时不良事件组与非不良事件组差异有统计学意义(P=0.008)。与o-PESI和m-PESI相比,s-PESI在检测死亡率、发病率和主要不良事件方面具有最高的敏感性和阴性预测值。s-PESI曲线下面积显著高于其他两个指标(曲线下面积=0.78,P=0.04)。结论s-PESI对低危急性PE患者的预后准确性优于o-PESI和m-PESI,且易于应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Egyptian Journal of Bronchology
Egyptian Journal of Bronchology RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
自引率
7.70%
发文量
56
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of atypical pneumonia by chest ultrasonography Safety and efficacy of high flow nasal canula in patients with mild hypercapnia Impact of comorbid pulmonary disease on COVID-19 disease severity and outcome: a retrospective cohort study Imaging changes of oil aspiration over time in children: a case series Diagnostic yield of combined ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and core needle biopsy versus either technique alone in peripheral lung and pleural lesions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1