Pulmonary Embolism in Pneumonia: Still a Diagnostic Challenge? Results of a Case-Control Study in 100 Patients

Standard

Pulmonary Embolism in Pneumonia: Still a Diagnostic Challenge? Results of a Case-Control Study in 100 Patients. / Paparoupa, Maria; Spineli, Loukia; Framke, Theodor; Ho, Huy; Schuppert, Frank; Gillissen, Adrian.

in: DIS MARKERS, Jahrgang 2016, 2016, S. 8682506.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/ZeitungSCORING: ZeitschriftenaufsatzForschungBegutachtung

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{f0c3abe539284f30a62fff1aeae95929,
title = "Pulmonary Embolism in Pneumonia: Still a Diagnostic Challenge? Results of a Case-Control Study in 100 Patients",
abstract = "This study evaluated the diagnostic value of D-dimer, CRP, and leucocytes count to detect an underlying pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with pneumonia. A predictive model of an underlying PE, based on laboratory markers and clinical symptoms, was our ultimate objective. Overall 100 patients underwent a computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the lung: 54 with coexistence of PE and pneumonia (cases) and 46 with pneumonia without PE (controls). Cases and controls were matched 1 : 1. Symptoms and paraclinical findings were registered on admission. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, search for an optimal threshold, and conditional logistic regression analysis were conducted. D-dimer has a moderate ability to detect PE in pneumonia. Sensitivity of D-dimer was estimated at 97.78% and specificity at 11.11%. No optimal cut-point has acceptable diagnostic ability. After excluding patients with sepsis, sensitivity was reduced to 96.97%, whereas specificity increased to 16.13%. Consolidation in chest X-ray and positive D-dimer predict better an underlying PE as D-dimer itself. Thus, discriminatory power of the prediction model (AUC of 0.740) is not much greater than D-dimer (AUC of 0.703). No threshold that could increase the diagnostic value of D-dimer or a prediction model which is significantly better than D-dimer itself was identified.",
keywords = "Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Biomarkers, Case-Control Studies, Female, Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pneumonia, Prognosis, Pulmonary Embolism, ROC Curve, Retrospective Studies, Young Adult, Comparative Study, Journal Article",
author = "Maria Paparoupa and Loukia Spineli and Theodor Framke and Huy Ho and Frank Schuppert and Adrian Gillissen",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1155/2016/8682506",
language = "English",
volume = "2016",
pages = "8682506",
journal = "DIS MARKERS",
issn = "0278-0240",
publisher = "IOS Press",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pulmonary Embolism in Pneumonia: Still a Diagnostic Challenge? Results of a Case-Control Study in 100 Patients

AU - Paparoupa, Maria

AU - Spineli, Loukia

AU - Framke, Theodor

AU - Ho, Huy

AU - Schuppert, Frank

AU - Gillissen, Adrian

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - This study evaluated the diagnostic value of D-dimer, CRP, and leucocytes count to detect an underlying pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with pneumonia. A predictive model of an underlying PE, based on laboratory markers and clinical symptoms, was our ultimate objective. Overall 100 patients underwent a computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the lung: 54 with coexistence of PE and pneumonia (cases) and 46 with pneumonia without PE (controls). Cases and controls were matched 1 : 1. Symptoms and paraclinical findings were registered on admission. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, search for an optimal threshold, and conditional logistic regression analysis were conducted. D-dimer has a moderate ability to detect PE in pneumonia. Sensitivity of D-dimer was estimated at 97.78% and specificity at 11.11%. No optimal cut-point has acceptable diagnostic ability. After excluding patients with sepsis, sensitivity was reduced to 96.97%, whereas specificity increased to 16.13%. Consolidation in chest X-ray and positive D-dimer predict better an underlying PE as D-dimer itself. Thus, discriminatory power of the prediction model (AUC of 0.740) is not much greater than D-dimer (AUC of 0.703). No threshold that could increase the diagnostic value of D-dimer or a prediction model which is significantly better than D-dimer itself was identified.

AB - This study evaluated the diagnostic value of D-dimer, CRP, and leucocytes count to detect an underlying pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with pneumonia. A predictive model of an underlying PE, based on laboratory markers and clinical symptoms, was our ultimate objective. Overall 100 patients underwent a computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the lung: 54 with coexistence of PE and pneumonia (cases) and 46 with pneumonia without PE (controls). Cases and controls were matched 1 : 1. Symptoms and paraclinical findings were registered on admission. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, search for an optimal threshold, and conditional logistic regression analysis were conducted. D-dimer has a moderate ability to detect PE in pneumonia. Sensitivity of D-dimer was estimated at 97.78% and specificity at 11.11%. No optimal cut-point has acceptable diagnostic ability. After excluding patients with sepsis, sensitivity was reduced to 96.97%, whereas specificity increased to 16.13%. Consolidation in chest X-ray and positive D-dimer predict better an underlying PE as D-dimer itself. Thus, discriminatory power of the prediction model (AUC of 0.740) is not much greater than D-dimer (AUC of 0.703). No threshold that could increase the diagnostic value of D-dimer or a prediction model which is significantly better than D-dimer itself was identified.

KW - Adult

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Biomarkers

KW - Case-Control Studies

KW - Female

KW - Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products

KW - Follow-Up Studies

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Pneumonia

KW - Prognosis

KW - Pulmonary Embolism

KW - ROC Curve

KW - Retrospective Studies

KW - Young Adult

KW - Comparative Study

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1155/2016/8682506

DO - 10.1155/2016/8682506

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 27313336

VL - 2016

SP - 8682506

JO - DIS MARKERS

JF - DIS MARKERS

SN - 0278-0240

ER -