Comparison of sensitivity and specificity of Wells rule and the revised Geneva score with CT angiography in identifying patients with pulmonary embolism
Researcher Bulletin of Medical Sciences,
Vol. 27 No. 1 (2022),
20 Aban 2022
,
Page e24
Abstract
Abstract
Background and Objective: The use of angiography is the gold standard in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE). However, the invasive side effects and being less accessible, it is rarely performed. This study sought to determine the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and positive and negative predictive value of Wells Rule and Revised Geneva Score in identifying patients with pulmonary embolism.
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed on 214 patients with suspected pulmonary embolism who referred to Masih Daneshvari Hospital in Tehran, Iran in 2020. The researchers recorded the CT angiographic findings of patients suspected of having pulmonary embolism. All the patients were evaluated based on each of the Wells Rule and revised Geneva score. Finally, the sensitivity and specificity of each score was evaluated in comparison with CT angiography as the gold standard method in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.
Results: The overall mean scores of the Revised Geneva Score and Wells Rule were 99.2± 33.6 and 68.2± 96.3, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the Revised Geneva Score were 90.6, 47.4 and 72%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the Wells Rule were 71.8, 75.3 and 77%, respectively. The positive predictive values (PPV) for the Wells Rule and the Revised Geneva Score were 67.5 and 77.8, respectively. Finally, the negative predictive values (NPV) for the Wells Rule and Revised Geneva Score were 80.7 and 68.9, respectively.
Conclusions: The Revised Geneva Score is highly accurate in diagnosing pulmonary embolism. The score could be used as a non-invasive clinical evaluation tool in the diagnosis of PE.
- Pulmonary embolism; Wells; Revised Geneva score; Accuracy; Specificity;Sensitivity
How to Cite
References
Remy-Jardin M, Pistolesi M, Goodman L, Gefter W, Gottschalk A, Mayo J, et al. Management of suspected acute pulmonary embolism in the era of CT angiography: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiol 2007;45:315-29.
Kucher N, Goldhaber S. Management of massive pulmonary embolism. Circulation 2005; 112(2): 28-32.
Henzler T, Barraza J, Nance J, Costello P, Krissak R, Fink C. CT imaging of acute pulmonary embolism. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography 2011; 5: 3-11.
Wu A, Pezzullo J, Cronan J, Hou D, Mayo-Smith W. CT Pulmonary Angiography: Quantification of Pulmonary Embolus as a Predictor of Patient Outcome—Initial Experience1. Radiology 2004; 230(3): 831-835.
Santos M, Uriona V, Exaire R, Mendoza D, Martínez G, Pulido T, et al. Massive pulmonary embolism, thrombus in transit, and right ventricular dysfunction. Arch Cardiol Mex 2007; 77(1): 44-53.
Jameson J, Kaspe rD, Fauci A, Hauser S, Longo D, Loscalzo J. Harrison's principles of internal medicine. 18th ed. New York: McGraw Hill Education, 2012:2170.
Gjonbrataj E, Kim J, Gjonbrataj J, Jung H, Kim H, Choi W. Risk factors associated with provoked pulmonary embolism. Korean J Intern Med 2017; 32: 95–101.
Battal B, Karaman B, Gümüş S, Akgün V, Bozlar U, Taşar M. The analysis of nonthromboembolic findings encountered in multidetector computedtomography pulmonary angiography studies in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Turk J Emerg Med 2011;11:1-13.
Burge A, Freeman K, Klapper P, Haramati L. Increased diagnosis of pulmonary embolism without a corresponding decline in mortality during the CT era. Clin Radiol 2008;63:381–6.
Woo J, Chiu R, Thakur Y, Mayo J. Risk-benefit analysis of pulmonary CT angiography in patients with suspected pulmonary embolus. Am J Roentgenol 2012. 198:1332-9.
Alavi-Moghaddam M, Safari S, Najafi I, Hosseini M. Accuracy of urine dipstick in the detection of patients at risk for crush-induced rhabdomyolysis and acute kidney injury. Eur J Emerg Med. 2012;19(5):329-32.
Amini A, Eghtesadi R, Feizi A, al. e. Sonographic Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter as a Screening Tool for Detection of Elevated Intracranial Pressure. Emergency. 2013;1(1):15-9.
Amini A, Kariman H, Dolatabadi A, al. e. Use of the sonographic diameter of optic nerve sheath to estimate intracranial pressure. Am J Emerg Med. 2013;31(1):236-9.
Baratloo A, Rahmati F, Rouhipour A, al. e. Correlation of Blood Gas Parameters with Central Venous Pressure in Patients with Septic Shock; a Pilot Study. Bull Emerg Trauma. 2014;2(2):77-81.
Dolatabadi A, Memary E, Amini A, Shojaee M, Abdalvand A, Hatamabadi H. Efficacy of measuring procalcitonin levels in determination of prognosis and early diagnosis of bacterial resistance in sepsis. Niger Med J. 2015;56(1):17-9.
Kariman H, Joorabian J, Shahrami A, Alimohammadi H, Noori Z, Safari S. Accuracy of emergency severity index of triage in Imam Hossein hospital-Tehran, Iran (2011). J Gorgan Uni Med Sci. 2013;15(1):115-20. [Persian].
Šimundić A-M. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: basic definitions. Med Biol Sci. 2008;22(4):61-5.
Altman D, Bland J. Statistics notes-diagnostic-tests-1-sensitivity and specificity. BMJ. 1994;308:1552-3.
Davidson M. The interpretation of diagnostic tests: A primer for physiotherapists. Aust J Physiother. 2002;48(3):227-32.
Albrecht M, Bickford M, Nance JJ, Zhang L, De Cecco C, Wichmann J, et al. State-of-the-art pulmonary CT angiography for acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Roentgenol 2017;208:495-504.
Tambe J, Moifo B, Fongang E, Guegang E, Juimo A. Acute pulmonary embolism in the era of multi-detector CT: a reality in sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Med Imaging 2012;12:31.
Carruthers E, Choi H, Sayre E, Avina –Zobieta G. Risk of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in individuals with polymyositis and dermatomyositis: a general population-based study. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:110-6.
Javadrashid R, Tarzamni M, Mozzayyan M, Ghaffari M, Fadaei Fouladi D, Masoudi Y, et al. Correlation between Findings of CT Pulmonary Angiography and Outcome of Diseases in Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism. Med J Tabriz Uni Med Sciences Health Services. 2016;38(5):6-11.
Esiéné A, Owono Etoundi P, Tochie J, al. e. Validity of four clinical prediction scores for pulmonary embolism in a sub-Saharan African setting: a protocol for a Cameroonian multicentre crosssectional study. BMJ Open 2019;9:e031322. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031322.
Rabab A, Wahsh E, Agha M. Clinical probability of pulmonary embolism: Comparison of different scoring systems. . Egyptian Journal of Chest Diseases and Tuberculosis. 2012;61:419–24.
Abolfotouh M, Almadani K, Al Rowaily M. Diagnostic Accuracy of D-Dimer Testing and the Revised Geneva Score in the Prediction of Pulmonary Embolism. Int J Gen Med. 2020 15(13):1537-43. doi: 10.2147/IJGM.S289289. PMID: 33363402; PMCID: PMC7751841.
Miniati M, Bottai M, Monti S. Comparison of 3 clinical models for predicting the probability of pulmonary embolism. Medicine (Baltimore). 2005;84 (2):107–11.
Douma R, Mos ICM, Erkens PMG, al. e. Performance of 4 clinical decision rules in the diagnostic management of acute pulmonary embolism. A prospective cohort study, Ann Intern Med. 2011;154 709–18.
- Abstract Viewed: 37 times