Under the conditions of this study, initial subcutaneous therapy with the low-molecular-weight heparin tinzaparin appeared to be as effective and safe as intravenous unfractionated heparin in patients with acute pulmonary embolism.
Objectives To assess the likelihood ratios of diagnostic strategies for pulmonary embolism and to determine their clinical application according to pretest probability. Data sources Medline, Embase, and Pascal Biomed and manual search for articles published from January 1990 to September 2003. Study selection Studies that evaluated diagnostic tests for confirmation or exclusion of pulmonary embolism. Data extracted Positive likelihood ratios for strategies that confirmed a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism and negative likelihood ratios for diagnostic strategies that excluded a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Data synthesis 48 of 1012 articles were included. Positive likelihood ratios for diagnostic tests were: high probability ventilation perfusion lung scan 18.3 (95% confidence interval 10.3 to 32.5), spiral computed tomography 24.1 (12.4 to 46.7), and ultrasonography of leg veins 16.2 (5.6 to 46.7). In patients with a moderate or high pretest probability, these findings are associated with a greater than 85% post-test probability of pulmonary embolism. Negative likelihood ratios were: normal or near normal appearance on lung scan 0.05 (0.03 to 0.10), a negative result on spiral computed tomography along with a negative result on ultrasonography 0.04 (0.03 to 0.06), and a d-dimer concentration < 500 g/l measured by quantitative enzyme linked immunosorbent assay 0.08 (0.04 to 0.18). In patients with a low or moderate pretest probability, these findings were associated with a post-test probability of pulmonary embolism below 5%. Spiral computed tomography alone, a low probability ventilation perfusion lung scan, magnetic resonance angiography, a quantitative latex d-dimer test, and haemagglutination d-dimers had higher negative likelihood ratios and can therefore only exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with a low pretest probability. Conclusions The accuracy of tests for suspected pulmonary embolism varies greatly, but it is possible to estimate the range of pretest probabilities over which each test or strategy can confirm or rule out pulmonary embolism.
Twelve centers participated in a double-blind study in which 63 patients with angiographically documented acute massive pulmonary embolism were randomly assigned to treatment with either urokinase (4,400 U/kg as an intravenous bolus infusion, then 4,400 U/kg per h over 12 h; n = 29) or alteplase (10 mg as an intravenous bolus infusion, then 90 mg over 2 h) followed by heparin (n = 34). The primary objective was to compare the resolution of pulmonary embolism as judged by the change in total pulmonary resistance over the initial 2 h. Further objectives were to evaluate the changes in total pulmonary resistance over the next 10 h and the degree of angiographic resolution at 12 to 18 h. At 2 h, total pulmonary resistance decreased by 18 +/- 22% in the urokinase group and by 36 +/- 17% in the alteplase group (p = 0.0009). Continuous monitoring of pulmonary artery mean pressure, cardiac index and total pulmonary resistance revealed that these variables improved faster in the alteplase group, with consistently significant intergroup differences from 30 min up to 3 to 4 h. After 12 h, the decrease in total pulmonary resistance was 53 +/- 19% in the urokinase group compared with 48 +/- 17% in the alteplase group and the reduction in the angiographic severity score was 30 +/- 25% compared with 24 +/- 18%, respectively, with no significant intergroup differences. Bleeding was equally frequent in the two treatment groups, except that more urokinase-treated patients experienced hematomas at puncture sites.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.