4.5 Article

Risk stratification and clinical outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary embolism

Journal

CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 44, Issue 13, Pages 1110-1115

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2011.06.077

Keywords

Mortality; Prognosis; Pulmonary embolism; Risk stratification; Hemodynamic instability

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Pulmonary embolism is a common disease associated with a high mortality rate. The risk assessment and appropriate treatment selection of patients with acute pulmonary embolism remains a challenge. Design and methods: This single center cohort study included a total of 150 patients (96 male, age = 71 +/- 15 years) with acute pulmonary embolism confirmed by spiral-computed tomography or magnetic resonance image. The prognostic performance of the clinical characteristics and laboratory values were investigated to predict the in-hospital hemodynamically instable events and 30-day all-cause mortality. Results: The rate of in-hospital hemodynamic instability and 30-day all-cause mortality was 21% and 12%, respectively. A multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated that a heart rate >= 110 bpm (odd ratio 4.26 [95% CI 1.42-12.77]), chronic pulmonary disease (6.47 [1.99-21.04]), WBC >= 11,000 mm(3) (3.78 [1.32-10.82]), and D-dimer level >= 4.0 mu g/mL (3.68 [1.01-13.43]) independently predicted the 30-day fatal outcome. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the categorization based on the number of risk factors was significantly associated with the likelihood of 30-day all-cause mortality (P<0.0001). Conclusions: The initial presentation of tachycardia, presence of chronic pulmonary disease, elevated WBC and D-dimer on admission can be used to identify the risk for a short-term fatal outcome within 30 days in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. (C) 2011 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available