Predictive scores for the diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism in COVID-19: A systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
During the COVID-19 pandemic, several studies described an increased chance of developing pulmonary embolism (PE). Several scores have been used to predict the occurrence of PE. This systematic review summarizes the literature on predicting rules for PE in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (HCPs).Methods
PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched to identify articles (1 January 2020-28 April 2021) presenting data pertaining to the use of a prediction rule to assess the risk for PE in adult HCPs. The investigated outcome was the diagnosis of PE. Studies presenting data using a single laboratory assay for PE prediction were excluded. Included studies were appraised for methodological quality using the Newcastle - Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies (NOS).Results
We obtained a refined pool of twelve studies for five scoring systems (Wells score, Geneva score, CHADS2/CHA2DS2VASc/M-CHA2DS2VASc, CHOD score, Padua Prediction Score), and 4,526 patients. Only one score was designed explicitly for HCPs. Three and nine included studies were prospective and retrospective cohort studies, respectively. Among the examined scores, the CHOD score seems promising for predictive ability.Conclusion
New prediction rules, specifically developed and validated for estimating the risk of PE in HCP, differentiating ICU from non-ICU patients, and taking into account anticoagulation prophylaxis, comorbidities, and the time from COVID-19 diagnosis are needed.
SUBMITTER: Rindi LV
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8627287 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE: To appraise the evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of CT pulmonary angiography and the prognostic value of a negative CT pulmonary angiogram in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, and grey literature were systematically searched by two researchers. Any study which compared CT pulmonary angiography to an acceptable reference standard or prospectively followed up a cohort of patients with a normal CT pulmonary angiogram was included. Study methods were appraised independently by two researchers, and data were extracted independently by three researchers. RESULTS: Thirteen diagnostic and 11 follow up studies were identified. Studies varied in prevalence of pulmonary embolism (19-79%), patient groups, and method quality. Few studies recruited unselected emergency department patients. There was heterogeneity in the analysis of sensitivity (53 to 100%), specificity (79 to 100%), and false negative rate (1.0 to 10.7%). The pooled false negative rate of combined negative CT pulmonary angiography and negative deep vein thrombosis testing was 1.5% (95% CI 1.0 to 1.9%). CONCLUSION: Diagnostic studies give conflicting results for the diagnostic accuracy of CT pulmonary angiography. Follow up studies show that CT pulmonary angiography can be used in combination with investigation for deep vein thrombosis to exclude pulmonary embolism.
| S-EPMC2464412 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) has been described as a frequent and prognostically relevant complication of COVID-19 infection. AIM:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the in-hospital incidence of acute PE among COVID-19 patients based on studies published within four months of COVID-19 outbreak. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in abstracting data and assessing validity. We searched Medline, Scopus and Web of Science to locate all articles published up to August 1, 2020 reporting the incidence of acute PE (or lung thrombosis) in COVID-19 patients. The pooled in-hospital incidence of acute PE among COVID-19 patients was calculated using a random effects model and presenting the related 95% confidence interval (CI). Statistical heterogeneity was measured using the Higgins I2 statistic. RESULTS:We analysed data from 7178 COVID-19 patients [mean age 60.4 years] included in twenty-three studies. Among patients hospitalized in general wards and intensive care unit (ICU), the pooled in-hospital incidence of PE (or lung thrombosis) was 14.7% of cases (95% CI: 9.9-21.3%, I2=95.0%, p<0.0001) and 23.4% (95% CI:16.7-31.8%, I2=88.7%, p<0.0001), respectively. Segmental/sub-segmental pulmonary arteries were more frequently involved compared to main/lobar arteries (6.8% vs18.8%, p<0.001). Computer tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) was used only in 35.3% of patients with COVID-19 infection across six studies. CONCLUSIONS:The in-hospital incidence of acute PE among COVID-19 patients is higher in ICU patients compared to those hospitalized in general wards. CTPA was rarely used suggesting a potential underestimation of PE cases.
| S-EPMC7498252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The association of pulmonary embolism (PE) with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear, and the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer tests for PE is unknown. Purpose To conduct meta-analysis of the study-level incidence of PE and DVT and to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer tests for PE from multicenter individual patient data. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search identified studies evaluating the incidence of PE or DVT in patients with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, to June 15, 2020. These outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model and were further evaluated using metaregression analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer tests for PE was estimated on the basis of individual patient data using the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Results Twenty-seven studies with 3342 patients with COVID-19 were included in the analysis. The pooled incidence rates of PE and DVT were 16.5% (95% CI: 11.6, 22.9; I2 = 0.93) and 14.8% (95% CI: 8.5, 24.5; I2 = 0.94), respectively. PE was more frequently found in patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (24.7% [95% CI: 18.6, 32.1] vs 10.5% [95% CI: 5.1, 20.2] in those not admitted to the ICU) and in studies with universal screening using CT pulmonary angiography. DVT was present in 42.4% of patients with PE. D-dimer tests had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.737 for PE, and D-dimer levels of 500 and 1000 ?g/L showed high sensitivity (96% and 91%, respectively) but low specificity (10% and 24%, respectively). Conclusion Pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) occurred in 16.5% and 14.8% of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), respectively, and more than half of patients with PE lacked DVT. The cutoffs of D-dimer levels used to exclude PE in preexisting guidelines seem applicable to patients with COVID-19. © RSNA, 2020 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Woodard in this issue.
| S-EPMC7745997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background COVID-19 appears to be associated with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the risk of clinically relevant VTE in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods This meta-analysis included original articles in English published from January 1st, 2020 to June 15th, 2020 in Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane. Outcomes were major VTE, defined as any objectively diagnosed pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Primary analysis estimated the risk of VTE, stratified by acutely and critically ill inpatients. Secondary analyses explored the separate risk of proximal DVT and of PE; the risk of major VTE stratified by screening and by type of anticoagulation. Results In 33 studies (n?=?4009 inpatients) with heterogeneous thrombotic risk factors, VTE incidence was 9% (95%CI 5–13%, I2 =?92.5) overall, and 21% (95%CI 14–28%, I2 =?87.6%) for patients hospitalized in the ICU. Proximal lower limb DVT incidence was 3% (95%CI 1–5%, I2 =?87.0%) and 8% (95%CI 3–14%, I2 =?87.6%), respectively. PE incidence was 8% (95%CI 4–13%, I2 =?92.1%) and 17% (95%CI 11–25%, I2 =?89.3%), respectively. Screening and absence of anticoagulation were associated with a higher VTE incidence. When restricting to medically ill inpatients, the VTE incidence was 2% (95%CI 0–6%). Conclusions The risk of major VTE among COVID-19 inpatients is high but varies greatly with severity of the disease. These findings reinforce the need for the use of thromboprophylaxis in all COVID-19 inpatients and for clinical trials testing different thromboprophylaxis regimens in subgroups of COVID-19 inpatients. Trial registration The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020193369). Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12959-021-00266-x.
| S-EPMC7942819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the likelihood ratios of diagnostic strategies for pulmonary embolism and to determine their clinical application according to pretest probability.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, and Pascal Biomed and manual search for articles published from January 1990 to September 2003.Study selectionStudies that evaluated diagnostic tests for confirmation or exclusion of pulmonary embolism. DATA EXTRACTED: Positive likelihood ratios for strategies that confirmed a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism and negative likelihood ratios for diagnostic strategies that excluded a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.Data synthesis48 of 1012 articles were included. Positive likelihood ratios for diagnostic tests were: high probability ventilation perfusion lung scan 18.3 (95% confidence interval 10.3 to 32.5), spiral computed tomography 24.1 (12.4 to 46.7), and ultrasonography of leg veins 16.2 (5.6 to 46.7). In patients with a moderate or high pretest probability, these findings are associated with a greater than 85% post-test probability of pulmonary embolism. Negative likelihood ratios were: normal or near normal appearance on lung scan 0.05 (0.03 to 0.10), a negative result on spiral computed tomography along with a negative result on ultrasonography 0.04 (0.03 to 0.06), and a d-dimer concentration < 500 mug/l measured by quantitative enzyme linked immunosorbent assay 0.08 (0.04 to 0.18). In patients with a low or moderate pretest probability, these findings were associated with a post-test probability of pulmonary embolism below 5%. Spiral computed tomography alone, a low probability ventilation perfusion lung scan, magnetic resonance angiography, a quantitative latex d-dimer test, and haemagglutination d-dimers had higher negative likelihood ratios and can therefore only exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with a low pretest probability.ConclusionsThe accuracy of tests for suspected pulmonary embolism varies greatly, but it is possible to estimate the range of pretest probabilities over which each test or strategy can confirm or rule out pulmonary embolism.
| S-EPMC1181264 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Acute pulmonary embolism is the third most common cause of cardiovascular death. Pulmonary embolism increases right ventricular afterload, which causes right ventricular failure, circulatory collapse and death. Most treatments focus on removal of the mechanical obstruction caused by the embolism, but pulmonary vasoconstriction is a significant contributor to the increased right ventricular afterload and is often left untreated. Pulmonary thromboembolism causes mechanical obstruction of the pulmonary vasculature coupled with a complex interaction between humoral factors from the activated platelets, endothelial effects, reflexes and hypoxia to cause pulmonary vasoconstriction that worsens right ventricular afterload. Vasoconstrictors include serotonin, thromboxane, prostaglandins and endothelins, counterbalanced by vasodilators such as nitric oxide and prostacyclins. Exogenous administration of pulmonary vasodilators in acute pulmonary embolism seems attractive but all come with a risk of systemic vasodilation or worsening of pulmonary ventilation-perfusion mismatch. In animal models of acute pulmonary embolism, modulators of the nitric oxide-cyclic guanosine monophosphate-protein kinase G pathway, endothelin pathway and prostaglandin pathway have been investigated. But only a small number of clinical case reports and prospective clinical trials exist. The aim of this review is to give an overview of the causes of pulmonary embolism-induced pulmonary vasoconstriction and of experimental and human investigations of pulmonary vasodilation in acute pulmonary embolism.
| S-EPMC7057411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since December 2019, a novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was confirmed as the etiologic agent of a worldwide outbreak of a pneumonia that can result in severe respiratory failure. This clinical entity seems to be associated with a marked hypercoagulable state that causes both arterial and venous thromboembolic complications. Therefore, an adequate anti-thrombotic prophylaxis is recommended in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Although rapidly worsening respiratory symptoms in a patient with SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infection may correlate with worsening pneumonia itself, it may also mask a pulmonary embolism. We report the case of a 50-year-old man affected by SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, who developed acute pulmonary embolism.
| S-EPMC7260472 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent reports have suggested an increased risk of pulmonary embolism (PE) related to COVID-19. The aim of this cohort study is to compare the incidence of PE during a 3-year period and to assess the characteristics of PE in COVID-19. We studied consecutive patients presenting with PE (January 2017–April 2020). Clinical presentation, computed tomography (CT) and biological markers were systematically assessed. We recorded the global number of hospitalizations during the COVID-19 pandemic and during the same period in 2018-2019. We included 347 patients: 326 without COVID-19 and 21 with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 experienced more likely dyspnea (p=0.04), had lower arterial oxygen saturation (p<0.001), higher C-reactive protein and white blood cell (WBC) count (p<0.0001 and p=0.001, respectively), and a significantly higher in-hospital mortality (14% versus 3.4%, p=0.04). Among COVID-19 patients, diagnosis of PE was performed at admission in 38% (n=8). COVID-19 patients with diagnosis of PE during hospitalization (n=13) had significantly more dyspnea (p=0.04), lower arterial oxygen saturation (p=0.01), less proximal PE (p=0.02), and higher heart rate (p=0.009), CT severity score (p=0.001), C-reactive protein (p=0.006) and WBC count (p=0.04). During the COVID-19 outbreak, a 97.4% increase of PE incidence was observed as compared to 2017–2019 and the proportion of hospitalizations related to PE was 3.7% versus 1.3% in 2018–2019 (p<0.0001). In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic leads to a dramatic increased incidence of PE. Physicians should be aware that PE may be diagnosed at admission, but also after several days of hospitalization, with a different clinical, CT and biological features of thrombotic disease. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11239-020-02292-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
| S-EPMC7538189 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterised by dyspnoea and abnormal coagulation parameters, including raised D-dimer. Data suggests a high incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in ventilated patients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVES:To determine the incidence of PE in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and the diagnostic yield of Computer Tomography Pulmonary Angiography (CTPA) for PE. We also examined the utility of D-dimer and conventional pre-test probability for diagnosis of PE in COVID-19. PATIENTS/METHODS:Retrospective review of single-centre data of all CTPA studies in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 identified from Electronic Patient Records (EPR). RESULTS:There were 1477 patients admitted with COVID-19 and 214 CTPA scans performed, of which n = 180 (84%) were requested outside of critical care. The diagnostic yield for PE was 37%. The overall proportion of PE in patients with COVID-19 was 5.4%. The proportions with Wells score of ?4 ('PE likely') was 33/134 (25%) without PE vs 20/80 (25%) with PE (P = 0.951). The median National Early Warning-2 (NEWS2) score (illness severity) was 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 3-9) in PE group vs 4 (IQR 2-7) in those without PE (P = 0.133). D-dimer was higher in PE (median 8000 ng/mL; IQR 4665-8000 ng/mL) than non-PE (2060 ng/mL, IQR 1210-4410 ng/mL, P < 0.001). In the 'low probability' group, D-dimer was higher (P < 0.001) in those with PE but had a limited role in excluding PE. CONCLUSIONS:Even outside of the critical care environment, PE in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 is common. Of note, approaching half of PE events were diagnosed on hospital admission. More data are needed to identify an optimal diagnostic pathway in patients with COVID-19. Randomised controlled trials of intensified thromboprophylaxis are urgently needed.
| S-EPMC7351054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:No single noninvasive test for pulmonary embolism is both sensitive and specific. Some tests are good for "ruling in" pulmonary embolism (e.g., helical CT) and some tests are good for "ruling out" pulmonary embolism (e.g., D-dimer); others are able to do both but are often nondiagnostic (e.g., ventilation-perfusion lung scanning). For optimal efficiency, choice of the initial diagnostic test should be guided by clinical assessment of the probability of pulmonary embolism and by patient characteristics that may influence test accuracy. This selective approach to testing enables pulmonary embolism to be diagnosed or excluded in a minimum number of steps. However, even with the appropriate use of combinations of noninvasive tests, it is often not possible to definitively diagnose or exclude pulmonary embolism at initial presentation. Most of these patients can be managed safely without treatment or pulmonary angiography by repeating ultrasound testing of the proximal veins after one and 2 weeks to detect evolving deep vein thrombosis. Helical CT and MRI are rapidly improving as diagnostic tests for pulmonary embolism and are expected to become central to its evaluation.
| S-EPMC140429 | biostudies-literature