- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT02190110
Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis: Ultrasound Wells Score vs Traditional Wells Score
Ultrasound Wells Score vs Traditional Wells Score in the Diagnostic Approach to Pulmonary Embolism
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.
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Firenze, Italy
- Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi
-
Milano, Italy
- Ospedale San Paolo, Università degli studi di Milano
-
Perugia, Italy
- Department of Internal Medicine, Università degli studi di Perugia
-
Torino, Italy
- Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria San Luigi Gonzaga
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
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.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / Cohort |
---|
Suspected pulmonary embolism patients
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.
Time Frame: 2 weeks after the end of recruitment
|
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
Time Frame: 2 weeks after the end of recruitment
|
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
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Peiman Nazerian, MD, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi, Firenze, Italia
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 1001 (Registro Nacional Estudios Clinicos (RNEC))
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Pulmonary Embolism
-
Boston Scientific CorporationEKOS CorporationCompletedPulmonary Embolism | Acute Pulmonary Embolism | Pulmonary Thromboembolism | Massive Pulmonary Embolism | Sub-massive Pulmonary EmbolismUnited States
-
Inari MedicalCompletedPulmonary Embolism | Submassive Pulmonary Embolism | Acute Pulmonary Embolism | Massive Pulmonary EmbolismUnited States
-
Hospital San Carlos, MadridAsociación de Cardiología Intervencionista de la Sociedad Española de CardiologíaRecruitingPulmonary Embolism | Pulmonary Embolism and Thrombosis | Pulmonary Thromboembolisms | Pulmonary Embolism Acute | Pulmonary Embolism Acute MassiveSpain
-
University of California, Los AngelesEnrolling by invitationPulmonary Disease | Pulmonary Embolism | Pulmonary Embolus/Emboli | Pulmonary Embolism and Thrombosis | Pulmonary Embolism Subacute Massive | Pulmonary Embolism Acute MassiveUnited States
-
Inari MedicalActive, not recruitingPE - Pulmonary Embolism | PE - Pulmonary ThromboembolismUnited States, Spain, Belgium, Germany, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, United Kingdom, Austria
-
Bristol-Myers SquibbCompletedPulmonary Embolism (PE) | Pulmonary ThromboembolismUnited Kingdom
-
GlaxoSmithKlineCompleted
-
Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía TorácicaCompletedPulmonary Hypertension | Pulmonary ThromboembolismsSpain
-
Victor Tapson, MDBristol-Myers SquibbTerminatedPulmonary Embolism | Right Ventricular Dysfunction | Right Ventricular Failure | Pulmonary Embolism With Acute Cor Pulmonale | Pulmonary Embolism With Pulmonary Infarction | Pulmonary Embolism Subacute MassiveUnited States
-
Imperative Care, Inc.RecruitingCardiovascular Diseases | Vascular Diseases | Embolism | Thrombosis | Thromboembolism | Acute Pulmonary Embolism | Thrombus; Embolism | Emboli, PulmonaryUnited States