Dataset Information

D-Dimer Level and Neutrophils Count as Predictive and Prognostic Factors of Pulmonary Embolism in Severe Non-ICU COVID-19 Patients.

ABSTRACT: The incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) is high during severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to identify predictive and prognostic factors of PE in non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In the retrospective multicenter observational CLOTVID cohort, we enrolled patients with confirmed RT-PCR COVID-19 who were hospitalized in a medicine ward and also underwent a CT pulmonary angiography for a PE suspicion. Baseline data, laboratory biomarkers, treatments, and outcomes were collected. Predictive and prognostics factors of PE were identified by using logistic multivariate and by Cox regression models, respectively. A total of 174 patients were enrolled, among whom 86 (median [IQR] age of 66 years [55-77]) had post-admission PE suspicion, with 30/86 (34.9%) PE being confirmed. PE occurrence was independently associated with the lack of long-term anticoagulation or thromboprophylaxis (OR [95%CI], 72.3 [3.6-4384.8]) D-dimers ≥ 2000 ng/mL (26.3 [4.1-537.8]) and neutrophils ≥ 7.0 G/L (5.8 [1.4-29.5]). The presence of these two biomarkers was associated with a higher risk of PE (p = 0.0002) and death or ICU transfer (HR [95%CI], 12.9 [2.5-67.8], p < 0.01). In hospitalized non-ICU severe COVID-19 patients with clinical PE suspicion, the lack of anticoagulation, D-dimers ≥ 2000 ng/mL, neutrophils ≥ 7.0 G/L, and these two biomarkers combined might be useful predictive markers of PE and prognosis, respectively.

SUBMITTER: Thoreau B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8146364 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAcute pulmonary embolism (PE) is one of the leading causes of maternal mortality, and cesarean section is an established independent risk factor for PE. The diagnostic utility of D-dimer for PE in non-pregnant women has been well-established, but its role in women with suspected PE after cesarean section is unclear. Furthermore, the optimal threshold level in this patient population is unknown. Traditional D-dimer levels have low diagnostic specificity, resulting in many pregnant women being exposed to potentially harmful radiation despite negative diagnostic imaging results. This research aimed to optimize the clinical threshold for D-dimer to improve specificity while ensuring high sensitivity and to identify risk factors for PE after cesarean section.MethodsThis retrospective study of 289 women who underwent diagnostic imaging (ventilation/perfusion [V/Q] or computed tomographic pulmonary angiography [CTPA]) for suspected acute PE after cesarean delivery from 2010 to 2021 was conducted. Clinical data and laboratory indicators within 24 h postpartum including D-dimer levels were collected for analyses.ResultsThe final analysis included 125 patients, among whom 33 were diagnosed with acute PE (incidence of 11.42%, 95% confidence interval 7.7-15.1). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis suggested that a D-dimer cut-off value of 800 ng/mL had specificity of 25.26% and sensitivity of 100% for detecting PE. The cut-off value was adjusted to 1000 ng/mL with a specificity of 34.74% and a sensitivity of 96.67%. Using a D-dimer cut-off value of 800 ng/mL (instead of the conventional value of 500 ng/mL) increased the number of patients excluded from suspected PE from 9.6 to 18.4% without additional false-negative results. Of note, a history of known thrombophilia was significantly more common in patients with PE than in those without (P < 0.05). No other independent risk factors were noted in our study.ConclusionsThe D-dimer cut-off value of 800 ng/mL ensures high sensitivity and increases specificity compared to the conventional threshold of 500 ng/mL. Utilizing this higher threshold can reduce the number of unnecessary CT and subsequently unnecessary radiation exposure, in women after cesarean delivery. Prospective studies should also be conducted to verify these results.

Project description:BackgroundPrognostic assessment is important for the management of patients with acute pulmonary embolism (APE). Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) and simple PESI (sPESI) are new emerged prognostic assessment tools for APE. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the accuracy of the PESI and the sPESI to predict prognostic outcomes (all-cause and PE-related mortality, serious adverse events) in APE patients, and compare between these two PESIs.MethodsMEDLINE and EMBASE database were searched up to June 2012 using the terms "Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index" and "pulmonary embolism". Summary odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for prognostic outcomes in low risk PESI versus high risk PESI were calculated. Summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) used to estimate overall predicting accuracies of prognostic outcomes.ResultsTwenty-one studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed low-risk PESI was significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (OR 0.13; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.15), PE-related mortality (OR 0.09; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.17) and serious adverse events (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.41), with no homogeneity across studies. In sPESI subgroup, the OR of all-cause mortality, PE-related mortality, and serious adverse events was 0.10 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.14), 0.09 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.26) and 0.40 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.51), respectively; while in PESI subgroup, the OR was 0.14 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.16), 0.09 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.21), and 0.30 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.38), respectively. For accuracy analysis, the pooled sensitivity, the pooled specificity, and the overall weighted AUC for PESI predicting all-cause mortality was 0.909 (95% CI: 0.900 to 0.916), 0.411 (95% CI: 0.407 to 0.415), and 0.7853±0.0058, respectively; for PE-related mortality, it was 0.953 (95% CI: 0.913 to 0.978), 0.374 (95% CI: 0.360 to 0.388), and 0.8218±0.0349, respectively; for serious adverse events, it was 0.821 (95% CI: 0.795 to 0.845), 0.389 (95% CI: 0.384 to 0.394), and 0.6809±0.0208, respectively. In sPESI subgroup, the AUC for predicting all-cause mortality, PE-related mortality, and serious adverse events was 0.7920±0.0117, 0.8317±0.0547, and 0.6454±0.0197, respectively. In PESI subgroup, the AUC was 0.7856±0.0075, 0.8158±0.0451, and 0.6609±0.0252, respectively.ConclusionsPESI has discriminative power to predict the short-term death and adverse outcome events in patients with acute pulmonary embolism, the PESI and the sPESI have similar accuracy, while sPESI is easier to use. However, the calibration for predicting prognosis can't be calculated from this meta-analysis, some prospective studies for accessing PESI predicting calibration can be recommended.

Project description:AimsThe non-invasive calculation of right ventricular (RV) haemodynamics as pulmonary artery (PA) capacitance (PAC) and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) have proved to be feasible, easy to perform, and of high prognostic value. We, therefore, evaluated whether baseline PAC and PVR could predict clinical outcomes for patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE).Methods and resultsWe prospectively followed 373 patients [mean (standard deviation) age, 64.1 (14.9) years; 58.4% were men, and 27.9% had cancer] who had acute PE and transthoracic echocardiography within 1 day of diagnosis from 1 March 2013 through 30 June 2020. Pulmonary artery capacitance was calculated as left ventricular stroke volume/(PA systolic pressure - PA diastolic pressure). Pulmonary vascular resistance was calculated as (tricuspid regurgitant velocity/RV outflow tract velocity time integral) × 10 + 0.16. These two variables were calculated retrospectively from the values obtained with transthoracic echocardiography. Pulmonary artery capacitance was acquired in 99 (27%) patients and PVR in 65 (17%) patients. Univariable and bivariable logistic regression analyses, and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the ability of these haemodynamic measurements to predict mortality up to 6 months. After using bivariable models to adjust individually for age, cancer, and pulmonary hypertension. Pulmonary vascular resistance was associated with all-cause mortality at 3 months [area under the curve (AUC) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.86; P = 0.01], and 6 months (AUC 0.81; 95% CI 0.69-0.91; P ≤ 0.03). Pulmonary artery capacitance was associated with all-cause mortality at 30 days (AUC 0.95; 95% CI 0.82-0.99; P < 0.001) and 3 months (AUC 0.84; 95% CI 0.65-0.99; P = 0.003).ConclusionNon-invasive measurement of RV haemodynamics could provide prognostic information of patients with acute PE. Pulmonary artery capacitance and PVR are potentially important predictors of all-cause mortality in these patients and should be explored in future studies.

Dataset Information

D-Dimer Level and Neutrophils Count as Predictive and Prognostic Factors of Pulmonary Embolism in Severe Non-ICU COVID-19 Patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets