MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2089260059 · doi:10.1111/acem.12459

Estimated Effect of an Integrated Approach to Suspected Deep Venous Thrombosis Using Limited‐compression Ultrasound

2014· article· en· W2089260059 sur OpenAlexaff
Rachel A. Poley, Joseph Newbigging, Marco L.A. Sivilotti

Notice bibliographique

RevueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Établissements canadiensQueen's UniversitySt. Michael's Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineDeep veinEmergency departmentThrombosisD-dimerRadiologyObservational studyVenous thrombosisGold standard (test)Pulmonary embolismSurgeryInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is both common and serious, yet the desire to never miss the diagnosis, coupled with the low specificity of D-dimer testing, results in high imaging rates, return visits, and empirical anticoagulation. The objective of this study was to evaluate a new approach incorporating bedside limited-compression ultrasound (LC US) by emergency physicians (EPs) into the workup strategy for DVT. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional observational study of emergency department (ED) patients with suspected DVT. Patients on anticoagulants; those with chronic DVT, leg cast, or amputation; or when the results of comprehensive imaging were already known were excluded. All patients were treated in the usual fashion based on the protocol in use at the center, including comprehensive imaging based on the modified Wells score and serum D-dimer testing. Seventeen physicians were trained and performed LC US in all subjects. The authors identified a priori an alternate workup strategy in which DVT would be ruled out in "DVT unlikely" (Wells score < 2) patients if the LC US was negative and in "DVT likely" (Wells score ≥ 2) patients if both the LC US and the D-dimer were negative. The criterion standard was based on comprehensive imaging interpreted by radiologists blinded to LC US findings and by structured medical record review at 6 months in patients without comprehensive imaging. RESULTS: A total of 227 patients were enrolled (47% DVT likely), of whom 24 had DVT. The LC US was positive in 27 cases (21 actually DVT positive), indeterminate in 28 (one DVT positive), and negative in 172 (two DVT positive). Of 130 patients deemed DVT negative by the new strategy, one had confirmed DVT (miss rate = 0.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.1% to 4.0%), but this patient had been misclassified by the treating physician as low risk by Wells criteria. The stand-alone sensitivity and specificity of LC US were 91% (95% CI = 70% to 98%) and 97% (95% CI = 92% to 99%), respectively. Incorporating LC US into the diagnostic approach would have reduced the rate of comprehensive imaging from 70% to 43%, D-dimer testing from 100% to 33%, and the mean time to diagnostic certainty by 5.0 hours and avoided 24 (11%) return visits for imaging and 10 (4.4%) cases of unnecessary anticoagulation. In 19% of cases, the treating and scanning physician disagreed whether the patient was DVT likely or DVT unlikely based on Wells score (κ = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Limited-compression US holds promise as one component of the diagnostic approach to DVT, but should not be used as a stand-alone test due to imperfect sensitivity. Tradeoffs in diagnostic efficiency for the sake of perfect sensitivity remain a difficult issue collectively in emergency medicine (EM), but need to be scrutinized carefully in light of the costs of overinvestigation, delays in diagnosis, and risks of empirical anticoagulation.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,776
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,050
Tête enseignante GPT0,361
Écart entre enseignants0,311 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations32
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAcademic Emergency MedicineMême sujetVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementTravaux en français237 207