Cargando…

A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism

OBJECTIVE: We tested whether bedside testing for H-FABP is, alone or integrated in combination models, useful for rapid risk stratification of non-high-risk PE. METHODS: We prospectively studied 136 normotensive patients with confirmed PE. H-FABP was determined using a qualitative bedside-test showi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lankeit, Mareike, Friesen, Dietrich, Schäfer, Katrin, Hasenfuß, Gerd, Konstantinides, Stavros, Dellas, Claudia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3536952/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23011575
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-012-0498-1
_version_ 1782254826004938752
author Lankeit, Mareike
Friesen, Dietrich
Schäfer, Katrin
Hasenfuß, Gerd
Konstantinides, Stavros
Dellas, Claudia
author_facet Lankeit, Mareike
Friesen, Dietrich
Schäfer, Katrin
Hasenfuß, Gerd
Konstantinides, Stavros
Dellas, Claudia
author_sort Lankeit, Mareike
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We tested whether bedside testing for H-FABP is, alone or integrated in combination models, useful for rapid risk stratification of non-high-risk PE. METHODS: We prospectively studied 136 normotensive patients with confirmed PE. H-FABP was determined using a qualitative bedside-test showing a positive result for plasma concentration >7 ng/ml. RESULTS: Overall, 11 patients (8.1 %) had an adverse 30-day outcome. Of 58 patients (42.6 %) with a positive H-FABP bedside-test, 9 (15.5 %) had an unfavourable course compared to 2 of 78 patients (2.6 %) with a negative test result (p = 0.009). Logistic regression analysis indicated a sevenfold increased risk for an adverse outcome (95 % CI, 1.45–33.67; p = 0.016) for patients with a positive H-FABP bedside-test. Additive prognostic information were obtained by a novel score including the H-FABP bedside-test (1.5 points), tachycardia (2 points), and syncope (1.5 points) (OR 11.57 [2.38–56.24]; p = 0.002 for ≥3 points). Increasing points were associated with a continuous exponential increase in the rate of an adverse 30-day outcome (0 % for patients with 0 points and 44.4 % for ≥5 points). Notably, this simple score provided similar prognostic value as the combination of the H-FABP bedside-test with echocardiographic signs of right ventricular dysfunction (OR 12.73 [2.51–64.43]; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Bedside testing for H-FABP appears a useful tool for immediate risk stratification of non-high-risk patients with acute PE, who may be at increased risk of an adverse outcome, in particular if integrated in a novel score without the need of echocardiographic examination.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3536952
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35369522013-01-04 A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism Lankeit, Mareike Friesen, Dietrich Schäfer, Katrin Hasenfuß, Gerd Konstantinides, Stavros Dellas, Claudia Clin Res Cardiol Original Paper OBJECTIVE: We tested whether bedside testing for H-FABP is, alone or integrated in combination models, useful for rapid risk stratification of non-high-risk PE. METHODS: We prospectively studied 136 normotensive patients with confirmed PE. H-FABP was determined using a qualitative bedside-test showing a positive result for plasma concentration >7 ng/ml. RESULTS: Overall, 11 patients (8.1 %) had an adverse 30-day outcome. Of 58 patients (42.6 %) with a positive H-FABP bedside-test, 9 (15.5 %) had an unfavourable course compared to 2 of 78 patients (2.6 %) with a negative test result (p = 0.009). Logistic regression analysis indicated a sevenfold increased risk for an adverse outcome (95 % CI, 1.45–33.67; p = 0.016) for patients with a positive H-FABP bedside-test. Additive prognostic information were obtained by a novel score including the H-FABP bedside-test (1.5 points), tachycardia (2 points), and syncope (1.5 points) (OR 11.57 [2.38–56.24]; p = 0.002 for ≥3 points). Increasing points were associated with a continuous exponential increase in the rate of an adverse 30-day outcome (0 % for patients with 0 points and 44.4 % for ≥5 points). Notably, this simple score provided similar prognostic value as the combination of the H-FABP bedside-test with echocardiographic signs of right ventricular dysfunction (OR 12.73 [2.51–64.43]; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Bedside testing for H-FABP appears a useful tool for immediate risk stratification of non-high-risk patients with acute PE, who may be at increased risk of an adverse outcome, in particular if integrated in a novel score without the need of echocardiographic examination. Springer-Verlag 2012-08-09 2013 /pmc/articles/PMC3536952/ /pubmed/23011575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-012-0498-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2012 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Lankeit, Mareike
Friesen, Dietrich
Schäfer, Katrin
Hasenfuß, Gerd
Konstantinides, Stavros
Dellas, Claudia
A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism
title A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism
title_full A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism
title_fullStr A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism
title_full_unstemmed A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism
title_short A simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism
title_sort simple score for rapid risk assessment of non-high-risk pulmonary embolism
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3536952/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23011575
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-012-0498-1
work_keys_str_mv AT lankeitmareike asimplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT friesendietrich asimplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT schaferkatrin asimplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT hasenfußgerd asimplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT konstantinidesstavros asimplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT dellasclaudia asimplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT lankeitmareike simplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT friesendietrich simplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT schaferkatrin simplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT hasenfußgerd simplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT konstantinidesstavros simplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism
AT dellasclaudia simplescoreforrapidriskassessmentofnonhighriskpulmonaryembolism