TY - JOUR
T1 - Differentiating Low-Risk and No-Risk PE Patients
T2 - The PERC Score
AU - Carpenter, Christopher R.
AU - Keim, Samuel M.
AU - Seupaul, Rawle A.
AU - Pines, Jesse M.
PY - 2009/4
Y1 - 2009/4
N2 - Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains one of the most challenging diagnoses in emergency medicine. The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC) score, a decision aid to reliably distinguish low-risk from very low-risk PE patients, has been derived and validated. Clinical Question: Can a subset of patients with sufficiently low risk for PE be identified who require no diagnostic testing? Evidence Review: The PERC score derivation and validation trials were located using PubMed and Web of Science. A critical appraisal of this research is presented. Results: One single-center and another multi-center validation trial both confirmed that the eight-item PERC score identified a very low-risk subset of patients in whom PE was clinically contemplated with a negative likelihood ratio 0.17 (95% confidence interval 0.11-0.25) in the larger trial. If applied, the rule would have identified 20% of potential PE patients as very low risk. Conclusion: The PERC score provides clinicians with an easily remembered, validated clinical decision rule that allows physicians to forego diagnostic testing for pulmonary embolus in a very low-risk population.
AB - Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains one of the most challenging diagnoses in emergency medicine. The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC) score, a decision aid to reliably distinguish low-risk from very low-risk PE patients, has been derived and validated. Clinical Question: Can a subset of patients with sufficiently low risk for PE be identified who require no diagnostic testing? Evidence Review: The PERC score derivation and validation trials were located using PubMed and Web of Science. A critical appraisal of this research is presented. Results: One single-center and another multi-center validation trial both confirmed that the eight-item PERC score identified a very low-risk subset of patients in whom PE was clinically contemplated with a negative likelihood ratio 0.17 (95% confidence interval 0.11-0.25) in the larger trial. If applied, the rule would have identified 20% of potential PE patients as very low risk. Conclusion: The PERC score provides clinicians with an easily remembered, validated clinical decision rule that allows physicians to forego diagnostic testing for pulmonary embolus in a very low-risk population.
KW - D-dimer
KW - clinical decision rules
KW - evidence-based medicine
KW - pulmonary embolism
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=62749099578&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.06.017
DO - 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.06.017
M3 - Article
C2 - 19097732
AN - SCOPUS:62749099578
SN - 0736-4679
VL - 36
SP - 317
EP - 322
JO - Journal of Emergency Medicine
JF - Journal of Emergency Medicine
IS - 3
ER -