Cargando…

Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for existing prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and determine how valid and useful they are for predicting patient outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: OVID MEDLINE and EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library from inception t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Elias, Antoine, Mallett, Susan, Daoud-Elias, Marie, Poggi, Jean-Noël, Clarke, Mike
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4854007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27130162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010324
_version_ 1782430162813452288
author Elias, Antoine
Mallett, Susan
Daoud-Elias, Marie
Poggi, Jean-Noël
Clarke, Mike
author_facet Elias, Antoine
Mallett, Susan
Daoud-Elias, Marie
Poggi, Jean-Noël
Clarke, Mike
author_sort Elias, Antoine
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for existing prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and determine how valid and useful they are for predicting patient outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: OVID MEDLINE and EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library from inception to July 2014, and sources of grey literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies aiming at constructing, validating, updating or studying the impact of prognostic models to predict all-cause death, PE-related death or venous thromboembolic events up to a 3-month follow-up in patients with an acute symptomatic PE. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics and study quality using prognostic criteria. Studies were selected and data extracted by 2 reviewers. DATA ANALYSIS: Summary estimates (95% CI) for proportion of risk groups and event rates within risk groups, and accuracy. RESULTS: We included 71 studies (44 298 patients). Among them, 17 were model construction studies specific to PE prognosis. The most validated models were the PE Severity Index (PESI) and its simplified version (sPESI). The overall 30-day mortality rate was 2.3% (1.7% to 2.9%) in the low-risk group and 11.4% (9.9% to 13.1%) in the high-risk group for PESI (9 studies), and 1.5% (0.9% to 2.5%) in the low-risk group and 10.7% (8.8% to12.9%) in the high-risk group for sPESI (11 studies). PESI has proved clinically useful in an impact study. Shifting the cut-off or using novel and updated models specifically developed for normotensive PE improves the ability for identifying patients at lower risk for early death or adverse outcome (0.5–1%) and those at higher risk (up to 20–29% of event rate). CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence-based information about the validity and utility of the existing prognostic models in acute PE that may be helpful for identifying patients at low risk. Novel models seem attractive for the high-risk normotensive PE but need to be externally validated then be assessed in impact studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4854007
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48540072016-05-06 Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis Elias, Antoine Mallett, Susan Daoud-Elias, Marie Poggi, Jean-Noël Clarke, Mike BMJ Open Cardiovascular Medicine OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for existing prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and determine how valid and useful they are for predicting patient outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: OVID MEDLINE and EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library from inception to July 2014, and sources of grey literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies aiming at constructing, validating, updating or studying the impact of prognostic models to predict all-cause death, PE-related death or venous thromboembolic events up to a 3-month follow-up in patients with an acute symptomatic PE. DATA EXTRACTION: Study characteristics and study quality using prognostic criteria. Studies were selected and data extracted by 2 reviewers. DATA ANALYSIS: Summary estimates (95% CI) for proportion of risk groups and event rates within risk groups, and accuracy. RESULTS: We included 71 studies (44 298 patients). Among them, 17 were model construction studies specific to PE prognosis. The most validated models were the PE Severity Index (PESI) and its simplified version (sPESI). The overall 30-day mortality rate was 2.3% (1.7% to 2.9%) in the low-risk group and 11.4% (9.9% to 13.1%) in the high-risk group for PESI (9 studies), and 1.5% (0.9% to 2.5%) in the low-risk group and 10.7% (8.8% to12.9%) in the high-risk group for sPESI (11 studies). PESI has proved clinically useful in an impact study. Shifting the cut-off or using novel and updated models specifically developed for normotensive PE improves the ability for identifying patients at lower risk for early death or adverse outcome (0.5–1%) and those at higher risk (up to 20–29% of event rate). CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence-based information about the validity and utility of the existing prognostic models in acute PE that may be helpful for identifying patients at low risk. Novel models seem attractive for the high-risk normotensive PE but need to be externally validated then be assessed in impact studies. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4854007/ /pubmed/27130162 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010324 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Cardiovascular Medicine
Elias, Antoine
Mallett, Susan
Daoud-Elias, Marie
Poggi, Jean-Noël
Clarke, Mike
Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Cardiovascular Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4854007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27130162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010324
work_keys_str_mv AT eliasantoine prognosticmodelsinacutepulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mallettsusan prognosticmodelsinacutepulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT daoudeliasmarie prognosticmodelsinacutepulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT poggijeannoel prognosticmodelsinacutepulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT clarkemike prognosticmodelsinacutepulmonaryembolismasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis