Prevalence of pulmonary embolism in patients with isolated syncope in the emergency department: the PEEPS multicenter prospective cohort study

Y. Freund, A. Philippon, A. Feral-Pierssens, Clara Damas Perrichet, S. Boussouar, V. Donciu, M. Cachanado, Pierre-Alexis Raynal
{"title":"Prevalence of pulmonary embolism in patients with isolated syncope in the emergency department: the PEEPS multicenter prospective cohort study","authors":"Y. Freund, A. Philippon, A. Feral-Pierssens, Clara Damas Perrichet, S. Boussouar, V. Donciu, M. Cachanado, Pierre-Alexis Raynal","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa3645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients that present to the Emergency Department (ED) with isolated syncope is unclear. Conflicting results were recently reported with a prevalence ranging from less than 1% to up to 17%. However, these studies included patients that may also have had other symptoms suggestive of PE (chest pain or dyspnea), or patients that had no systematic assessment for the presence of PE. Since a low prevalence ( Aims: to evaluate the prevalence of PE in ED patients with isolated syncope. Methods: Multicenter prospective cohort study in seven EDs in France. Adult patients who presented to the ED with syncope (transient loss of consciousness) were included. Patients with chest pain or dyspnea were excluded. Included patients underwent formal work-up for PE, including D-dimer testing and further imaging if positive. Cases of PE were adjudicated by two independent expert radiologists with the review of imaging studies. Results: 411 patients were recruited and tested with D-dimer, in whom 137 (33%) underwent a computed tomographic pulmonary angiogram or a ventilation-perfusion scan. A PE was confirmed in nine patients (prevalence of 2.2%, 95% confidence interval 1.1% to 4.3%), including one sub-segmental PE. Conclusion: In our sample of patients with isolated syncope, the prevalence of PE was 2.2%. This value is not sufficiently low to negate the requirement for a formal work up in the ED, even in the absence of chest pain or dyspnea.","PeriodicalId":20797,"journal":{"name":"Pulmonary embolism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulmonary embolism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa3645","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: The prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients that present to the Emergency Department (ED) with isolated syncope is unclear. Conflicting results were recently reported with a prevalence ranging from less than 1% to up to 17%. However, these studies included patients that may also have had other symptoms suggestive of PE (chest pain or dyspnea), or patients that had no systematic assessment for the presence of PE. Since a low prevalence ( Aims: to evaluate the prevalence of PE in ED patients with isolated syncope. Methods: Multicenter prospective cohort study in seven EDs in France. Adult patients who presented to the ED with syncope (transient loss of consciousness) were included. Patients with chest pain or dyspnea were excluded. Included patients underwent formal work-up for PE, including D-dimer testing and further imaging if positive. Cases of PE were adjudicated by two independent expert radiologists with the review of imaging studies. Results: 411 patients were recruited and tested with D-dimer, in whom 137 (33%) underwent a computed tomographic pulmonary angiogram or a ventilation-perfusion scan. A PE was confirmed in nine patients (prevalence of 2.2%, 95% confidence interval 1.1% to 4.3%), including one sub-segmental PE. Conclusion: In our sample of patients with isolated syncope, the prevalence of PE was 2.2%. This value is not sufficiently low to negate the requirement for a formal work up in the ED, even in the absence of chest pain or dyspnea.
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
急诊科孤立性晕厥患者肺栓塞患病率:PEEPS多中心前瞻性队列研究
在急诊(ED)孤立性晕厥患者中肺栓塞(PE)的患病率尚不清楚。最近报告的结果相互矛盾,患病率从不足1%到高达17%不等。然而,这些研究包括可能有其他提示PE症状(胸痛或呼吸困难)的患者,或没有系统评估PE存在的患者。目的:评价PE在ED伴孤立性晕厥患者中的患病率。方法:对法国7例急诊科患者进行多中心前瞻性队列研究。以晕厥(一过性意识丧失)向急诊科就诊的成年患者也包括在内。排除胸痛或呼吸困难患者。纳入的患者接受了PE的正式检查,包括d -二聚体测试和进一步的影像学检查。PE病例由两名独立的放射科专家通过对影像学研究的回顾来裁决。结果:招募了411例患者并进行了d -二聚体测试,其中137例(33%)接受了计算机断层肺血管造影或通气灌注扫描。9例患者确诊PE(患病率2.2%,95%可信区间1.1% - 4.3%),包括1例亚节段性PE。结论:在我们的孤立性晕厥患者样本中,PE患病率为2.2%。即使在没有胸痛或呼吸困难的情况下,这个值也不足以否定急诊科对正式工作的要求。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Surgical Treatment of Acute Pulmonary Embolism Imaging Modalities in Venous-Thromboembolism: Ultrasound for Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis Imaging Modalities in Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Computerized Tomography Integrating Clinical, Laboratory and Imaging Tests in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism Pulmonary Embolism: Information for the Patient and Family
×
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