4.6 Article

A comparison of the original and simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index

Journal

THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS
Volume 106, Issue 3, Pages 423-428

Publisher

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1160/TH11-04-0263

Keywords

Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index; prognosis

Funding

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [1 R21 HL075521-01A1]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation [33CSCO-122659]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) s a validated clinical prognostic model for patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). Recently, a simplified version of the PESI was developed. We sought to compare the prognostic performance of the original and simplified PESI. Using data from 15,531 patients with PE, we compared the proportions of patients classified as low versus higher risk between the original and simplified PESI and estimated 30-day mortality within each risk group. To assess the models' accuracy to predict mortality, vie calculated sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values and likelihooc ratios for low- versus higher-risk patients. We also compared the models' discriminative power by calculating the area under the receivei-operating characteristic curve. The overall 30-day mortality was 9.3%. The original PESI classified a significantly greater proportion of patients as low-risk than the simplified PESI (40.9% vs. 36.8%; p<0.001). Low-risk patients based on the original and simplified PESI had a mortality of 2.3% and 2.7%, respectively. The original and simplified PESI had similar sensitivities (90% vs. 89%), negative predictive values (98% vs. 97%), and negative likelihood ratios (0.23 vs. 0.28) for predicting mortality. The original PESI had a significantly greater discriminatory power than the simplified PESI (area under the ROC curve 0.78 [95% Cl: 0.77-0.791 vs. 0.72 [95% CI: 0.71-0.741; p<0.001). In conclusion, even though the simplified PESI accurately identified patients at low-risk of adverse outcomes, the original PESI classified a higher proportion of patients as low-risk and had a greater discriminatory power than the simplified PESI.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available