Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a serious and sometimes life-threatening condition that refers to a blood clot that occludes the arteries of the lung. Despite all improvements over the past decades,... Show morePulmonary embolism (PE) is a serious and sometimes life-threatening condition that refers to a blood clot that occludes the arteries of the lung. Despite all improvements over the past decades, diagnosing PE is still a difficult process due to the non-specific symptoms, which can frequently overlap with symptoms of other cardiopulmonary diseases. Currently recommended diagnostic strategies for suspected acute PE consist of standardized assessment of the clinical pre-test probability (CPTP) using validated clinical decision rules (CDRs) and D-dimer testing. PE is considered safely ruled out in patients with a non-high CPTP and a normal D-dimer test. Imaging tests as computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) are required in the case of a high CPTP and/or abnormal D-dimer test to confirm the diagnosis. The first part of this thesis describes the challenges of diagnosing PE in general and in specific clinically relevant patient subgroups. Moreover, this part evaluates the diagnostic performance of non-invasive diagnostic strategies for suspected PE in specific relevant patient subgroups. The second part of this thesis focuses on venous thrombotic complications in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Show less
BackgroundThe recently published 4-level Pulmonary Embolism Clinical Probability Score (4PEPS) integrates different aspects from currently available diagnostic strategies to further reduce imaging... Show moreBackgroundThe recently published 4-level Pulmonary Embolism Clinical Probability Score (4PEPS) integrates different aspects from currently available diagnostic strategies to further reduce imaging testing in patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism (PE).AimTo externally validate the performance of 4PEPS in an independent cohort.MethodsIn this post-hoc analysis of the prospective diagnostic management YEARS study, the primary outcome measures were discrimination, calibration, efficiency (proportion of imaging tests potentially avoided), and failure rate (venous thromboembolism (VTE) diagnosis at baseline or follow-up in patients with a negative 4PEPS algorithm). Multiple imputation was used for missing 4PEPS items. Based on 4PEPS, PE was considered ruled out in patients with a very low clinical pre-test probability (CPTP) without D-dimer testing, in patients with a low CPTP and D-dimer <1000 μg/L, and in patients with a moderate CPP and D-dimer below the age-adjusted threshold.ResultsOf the 3465 patients, 474 (14 %) were diagnosed with VTE at baseline or during 3-month follow-up. Discriminatory performance of the 4PEPS items was good (area under ROC-curve, 0.82; 95%CI, 0.80–0.84) as was calibration. Based on 4PEPS, PE could be considered ruled out without imaging in 58 % (95%CI 57–60) of patients (efficiency), for an overall failure rate of 1.3 % (95%CI 0.86–1.9).ConclusionIn this retrospective external validation, 4PEPS appeared to safely rule out PE with a high efficiency. Nevertheless, although not exceeding the failure rate margin by ISTH standards, the observed failure rate in our analysis appeared to be higher than in the original 4PEPS derivation and validation study. This highlights the importance of a prospective outcome study. Show less
