Pulmonary embolism: investigation of the clinically assessed intermediate risk subgroup

An overview of systematic reviews on imaging tests for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism applying different network meta-analytic methods

PURPOSE

This study aimed to apply different methods of diagnostic test accuracy network meta-analysis (DTA-NMA) for studies reporting results of five imaging tests for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism (PE): pulmonary angiography (PA), computed tomography angiography (CTPA), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), planar ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) scintigraphy and single-photon emission computed tomography ventilation/perfusion (SPECT V/Q).

METHODS

We searched four databases (MEDLINE [via PubMed], Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and Epistemonikos) from inception until June 2, 2022 to identify systematic reviews (SRs) describing diagnostic accuracy of PA, CTPA, MRA, V/Q scan and SPECT V/Q for suspected PE. Study-level data were extracted and pooled using a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) meta-regression approach and two DTA-NMA models to compare accuracy estimates of different imaging tests. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2) tool and certainty of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework.

RESULTS

We identified 13 SRs, synthesizing data from 33 primary studies and for four imaging tests (PA, CTPA, MRA and V/Q scan). The HSROC meta-regression model using PA as the reference standard showed that MRA had the best overall diagnostic performance with sensitivity of 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76, 1.00) and specificity of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.99). However, DTA-NMA models indicated that V/Q scan had the highest sensitivity, while CTPA was most specific.

CONCLUSION

Selecting a different DTA-NMA method to assess multiple diagnostic tests can affect estimates of diagnostic accuracy. There is no established method, but the choice depends on the data and familiarity with Bayesian statistics.

Sex differences in guideline-consistent diagnostic testing for acute pulmonary embolism among adult emergency department patients aged 18-49

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a frequent diagnostic consideration in emergency department (ED) patients, yet diagnosis is challenging because symptoms of PE are nonspecific. Guidelines recommend the use of clinical decision tools to increase efficiency and avoid harms from overtesting, including D-dimer screening in patients not at high risk for PE. Women undergo testing for PE more often than men yet have a lower yield from testing. Our study objective was to determine whether patient sex influenced the odds of received guideline-consistent care.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study at two large U.S. academic EDs from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. Nonpregnant patients aged 18-49 years were included if they presented with chest pain, shortness of breath, hemoptysis, or syncope and underwent testing for PE with D-dimer or imaging. Demographic and clinical data were exported from the electronic medical record (EMR). Pretest risk scores were calculated using manually abstracted EMR data. Diagnostic testing was then compared with recommended testing based on pretest risk. The primary outcome was receipt of guideline-consistent care, which required an elevated screening D-dimer prior to imaging in all non-high-risk patients.

RESULTS

We studied 1991 discrete patient encounters; 37% (735) of patients were male and 63% (1256) were female. Baseline characteristics, including revised Geneva scores, were similar between sexes. Female patients were more likely to receive guideline-consistent care (70% [874/1256] female vs. 63% [463/735] male, p < 0.01) and less likely to be diagnosed with PE (3.1% [39/1256] female vs. 5.3% [39/735] male, p < 0.05). The most common guideline deviation in both sexes was obtaining imaging without a screening D-dimer in a non-high-risk patient (75% [287/382] female vs. 75% [205/272] male).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, females were more likely than males to receive care consistent with current guidelines and less likely to be diagnosed with PE.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common, potentially life-threatening yet treatable condition. Prompt diagnosis and expeditious therapeutic intervention is of paramount importance for optimal patient management. Our objective was to systematically review the accuracy of D-dimer assay, compression ultrasonography (CUS), computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), and ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scanning for the diagnosis of suspected first and recurrent PE. We searched Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for eligible studies, reference lists of relevant reviews, registered trials, and relevant conference proceedings. 2 investigators screened and abstracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. We pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. The review included 61 studies. The pooled estimates for D-dimer sensitivity and specificity were 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-0.98) and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.36-0.46) respectively, whereas CTPA sensitivity and specificity were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.89-0.97) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99), respectively, and CUS sensitivity and specificity were 0.49 (95% CI, 0.31-0.66) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98), respectively. Three variations of pooled estimates for sensitivity and specificity of V/Q scan were carried out, based on interpretation of test results. D-dimer had the highest sensitivity when compared with imaging. CTPA and V/Q scans (high probability scan as a positive and low/non-diagnostic/normal scan as negative) both had the highest specificity. This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO as CRD42018084669.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Chest Pain-Suspected Pulmonary Embolism

Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a common and important clinical condition that cannot be accurately diagnosed on the basis of signs, symptoms, and history alone. The diagnosis of PE has been facilitated by technical advancements and multidetector CT pulmonary angiography, which is the major diagnostic modality currently used. Ventilation and perfusion scans remain largely accurate and useful in certain settings. Lower-extremity ultrasound can substitute by demonstrating deep vein thrombosis; however, if negative, further studies to exclude PE are indicated. In all cases, correlation with the clinical status, particularly with risk factors, improves not only the accuracy of diagnostic imaging but also overall utilization. Other diagnostic tests have limited roles. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Evaluation of Patients With Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Best Practice Advice From the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION

Pulmonary embolism (PE) can be a severe disease and is difficult to diagnose, given its nonspecific signs and symptoms. Because of this, testing patients with suspected acute PE has increased dramatically. However, the overuse of some tests, particularly computed tomography (CT) and plasma d-dimer measurement, may not improve care while potentially leading to patient harm and unnecessary expense.

METHODS

The literature search encompassed studies indexed by MEDLINE (1966-2014; English-language only) and included all clinical trials and meta-analyses on diagnostic strategies, decision rules, laboratory tests, and imaging studies for the diagnosis of PE. This document is not based on a formal systematic review, but instead seeks to provide practical advice based on the best available evidence and recent guidelines. The target audience for this paper is all clinicians; the target patient population is all adults, both inpatient and outpatient, suspected of having acute PE.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1

Clinicians should use validated clinical prediction rules to estimate pretest probability in patients in whom acute PE is being considered.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2

Clinicians should not obtain d-dimer measurements or imaging studies in patients with a low pretest probability of PE and who meet all Pulmonary Embolism Rule-Out Criteria.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3

Clinicians should obtain a high-sensitivity d-dimer measurement as the initial diagnostic test in patients who have an intermediate pretest probability of PE or in patients with low pretest probability of PE who do not meet all Pulmonary Embolism Rule-Out Criteria. Clinicians should not use imaging studies as the initial test in patients who have a low or intermediate pretest probability of PE.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4

Clinicians should use age-adjusted d-dimer thresholds (age × 10 ng/mL rather than a generic 500 ng/mL) in patients older than 50 years to determine whether imaging is warranted.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5

Clinicians should not obtain any imaging studies in patients with a d-dimer level below the age-adjusted cutoff.

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6

Clinicians should obtain imaging with CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in patients with high pretest probability of PE. Clinicians should reserve ventilation-perfusion scans for patients who have a contraindication to CTPA or if CTPA is not available. Clinicians should not obtain a d-dimer measurement in patients with a high pretest probability of PE.

Assessing 2 D-dimer age-adjustment strategies to optimize computed tomographic use in ED evaluation of pulmonary embolism

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Validate the sensitivity and specificity of 2 age adjustment strategies for d-dimer values in identifying patients at risk for pulmonary embolism (PE) compared with traditional D-dimer cutoff value (500 ng/mL) to decrease inappropriate computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) use.

METHODS

This institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective study included all adult emergency department patients evaluated for PE over a 32-month period (1/1/11-8/30/13). Only patients undergoing CTPA and D-dimer testing were included. We used a validated natural language processing algorithm to parse CTPA radiology reports and determine the presence of acute PE. Outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity of 2 age-adjusted D-dimer cutoffs compared with the traditional cutoff. We used χ2 tests with proportional analyses to assess differences in traditional and age-adjusted (age×10 ng/mL) D-dimer cutoffs, adjusting both by decade and by year.

RESULTS

A total 3063 patients with suspected PE were evaluated by CTPA during the study period, and 1055 (34%) also received d-dimer testing. The specificity of age-adjusted D-dimer values was similar or higher for each age group studied compared with traditional cutoff, without significantly compromising sensitivity. Overall, had decade age-adjusted cutoffs been used, 37 CTPAs could have been avoided (19.6% of 189 patients aged >60 years with Wells score≤4); had yearly age-adjusted cutoffs been used, 52 CTPAs (18.2% of 286 patients aged >50 years with Wells score≤4) could have been avoided.

CONCLUSION

Each age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff strategy for the evaluation of PE was associated with increased specificity and statistically insignificant decreased sensitivity when compared with the traditional D-dimer cutoff value.