Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis: Ultrasound Wells Score vs Traditional Wells Score

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Pulmonary embolism (PE) should be suspected in patients with dyspnea, chest pain, syncope, shock/hypotension, or cardiac arrest. Discriminating patients in different categories of pre-test probability of PE has become a key step in all diagnostic algorithms for PE. The most frequently used clinical prediction rule is the Wells score (PE likely > 4 points and PE unlikely ≤ 4 points). PE can be safely ruled out in patients with a PE unlikely associated with a negative d-dimer test result. Conversely, patients with PE likely or positive d-dimer level should undergo further diagnostic testing, like multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography (MCTPA). Wells score accuracy is not optimal. Vein and lung US can be rapidly performed at bedside as an extension of physical examination and have a high specificity. The aim of this study is to evaluate if the combination of clinical data reported in the Wells score and US data obtained from vein and lung US (US Wells score) has a better diagnostic accuracy compared to traditional Wells score. In adult patients suspected of PE traditional Wells score will be calculated and vein and lung US (multiorgan US) will be performed in all patients and and US Wells score calculated. The US Wells score differs from the traditional Wells score in the following items: signs and symptoms of DVT, replaced by vein US showing DVT, and alternative diagnosis less likely than PE replaced by alternative diagnosis less likely than PE after multiorgan US. This latter item is considered positive if at least one subpleural infarct is detected at lung US, and negative if no subpleural infarcts are detected and an alternative diagnosis like pneumonia, pleural effusion or diffuse interstitial syndrome may explain the symptoms of presentation. If no findings are detected at lung US, the points for the item remain the same assigned by traditional Wells score. Final diagnosis of PE will be preferentially established by MCTPA and in patients discharged without a second level imaging test because of negative Wells or d-dimer, and patients with not conclusive second level diagnostic test, will enter the 3 months follow-up protocol. The diagnostic performance of traditional and US Wells scores will be assessed by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value, and likelihood ratios. Failure rate and efficacy of d-dimer in patients stratified as PE likely and PE unlikely will also be calculated.

Official Title
-----------------
Ultrasound Wells Score vs Traditional Wells Score in the Diagnostic Approach to Pulmonary Embolism

Conditions
-----------------
Pulmonary Embolism

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients more than 18 years old Patients presenting with dyspnea, thoracic pain or syncope, palpitations, cardiac arrest Suspicion of PE Exclusion Criteria: Patient did not consent to participate in the study Presence of a diagnosis alternative to PE objectively demonstrated after the first assessment.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Suspected pulmonary embolism patients<br>Adult patients (more than 18 years old) suspected of PE will be recruited at the time of the medical evaluation and before a final diagnosis is established | |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| ultrasound Wells score vs traditional Wells score diagnostic performance. | The diagnostic performance of traditional and US Wells scores will be assessed by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and likelihood ratios. | 2 weeks after the end of recruitment | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Failure rate and efficiency of traditional and US Wells | Failure rate and efficacy of d-dimer in patients stratified as PE likely and PE unlikely will also be calculated. Failure rate (false negative proportion) will be calculated as the number of patients with negative d-dimer and confirmed PE diagnosis, divided for all patients with negative d-dimer in the same risk group. The efficiency will be calculated as the number of patients with negative d-dimer in one risk group divided for all patients included in the study. | 2 weeks after the end of recruitment | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Pulmonary embolism, diagnosis, emergency medicine, ultrasonography