Abstract

The purpose was to evaluate clinical characteristics associated with low confidence in diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) as expressed in computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) reports and to evaluate the effect of confidence level in PE diagnosis on patient clinical outcomes. This study included radiology reports from 1664 consecutive CTPA considered positive for acute PE (8/2003-5/2010). All reports were retrospectively assessed for the level of confidence in diagnosis. Baseline characteristics and outcomes (therapies related to PE and short-term mortality) were compared between high and low confidence groups. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were used to analyze the relationship between the confidence level and outcomes. One-hundred sixty of 1664 (9.6%) reports had language that reflected a low confidence in PE diagnosis. The low confidence group had smaller (segmental and subsegmental) suspected emboli (prevalence, 72.5% vs. 50.7%; P < .001) and more comorbidities. The low confidence group had a lower likelihood of receiving PE-related therapies (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-031, P < .001), but there was no change in the all-cause and PE-related 30-day and/or 90-day mortality (OR of death for low confidence, 0.81-1.13, P values > .5). Roughly 10% of positive CTPA reports had uncertainty in PE findings, and patients with reports categorized as low confidence had smaller emboli and more comorbidities. Although the low confidence group was less likely to receive PE-related therapies, patients in this group were not associated with higher probability of short-term mortality.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.