PURLs

Ruling out PE in pregnancy

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

WHAT’S NEW

Clinical probability and D-dimer rule out PE in pregnant women

This study ruled out PE in patients with low/intermediate risk as determined by the revised Geneva score and a D-dimer test, enabling patients to avoid further diagnostic testing. This low-cost strategy can be applied easily to the pregnant population.

CAVEATS

Additional research is still needed

From the results of this study, 11.6% of patients (n = 46) had a PE ruled out utilizing the revised Geneva score in conjunction with a D-dimer test result, with avoidance of chest imaging. However, this study was powered for the entire treatment algorithm and was not specifically powered for patients with low- or intermediate-risk pretest probability scores. Since this is the first published prospective diagnostic study of VTE in pregnancy, further research is needed to confirm the findings that a clinical prediction tool and a negative D-dimer test result can safely rule out PE in pregnant women.

This strategy ruled out PE in patients with low/ intermediate risk as determined by the revised Geneva score and a D-dimer test, enabling patients to avoid further diagnostic testing.

In addition, further research is needed to determine pregnancy-adapted D-dimer cut-off values, as the researchers of this study noted that < 500 mcg/L was useful in the first and second trimester, but that levels increased as gestational age increased.

CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION

None to speak of

Implementing a diagnostic algorithm that incorporates sequential assessment of pretest clinical probability based on the revised Geneva score and a D-dimer measurement should be relatively easy to implement, as both methods are readily available and relatively inexpensive.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The PURLs Surveillance System was supported in part by Grant Number UL1RR024999 from the National Center For Research Resources, a Clinical Translational Science Award to the University of Chicago. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center For Research Resources or the National Institutes of Health.

Pages

Copyright © 2020. The Family Physicians Inquiries Network. All rights reserved.

Online-Only Materials

AttachmentSize
PDF icon jfp06910414_methodology.pdf203.66 KB

Recommended Reading

Breast cancer screening complexities
MDedge Family Medicine
HPV vaccine shown to substantially reduce cervical cancer risk
MDedge Family Medicine
FDA updates info on postmarketing surveillance study of Essure
MDedge Family Medicine
FDA proposes withdrawing Makena’s approval
MDedge Family Medicine
New nonhormonal hot flash treatments on the way
MDedge Family Medicine
Enhanced recovery program improves outcomes after cesarean delivery
MDedge Family Medicine
Choosing Wisely: 10 practices to stop—or adopt—to reduce overuse in health care
MDedge Family Medicine
Don’t discount ultrapotent topical corticosteroids for vulvar lichen sclerosus
MDedge Family Medicine
Primary prevention of VTE spans a spectrum
MDedge Family Medicine
Female cardiac advantage essentially lost after MI
MDedge Family Medicine