January 1, 2007The Annals of Family MedicineOpen Access

Review of the Evidence on Diagnosis of Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

What is the efficacy of various diagnostic techniques for deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism?

Population

Patients suspected of having deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism

Design

Systematic_review

Authors

JSJodi B SegalNorthwestern University JEJohn EngBrigham Young University LTLeonardo TamarizGeneral / Preventive / Lipids

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Supports D-dimer and ultrasonography for safe DVT/PE rule-out in low-risk patients; reinforces guideline-endorsed diagnostic algorithms.

Structured PICO

What is the efficacy of various diagnostic techniques for deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism?

Population

Patients suspected of having deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism

Intervention

Diagnostic techniques including clinical prediction rules (Wells model), D-dimer assay, ultrasonography, and helical computed tomography

Outcome

Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value)

Clinical prediction rules combined with D-dimer testing can safely rule out DVT/PE in low-probability patients, while ultrasonography is highly sensitive for proximal DVT.

Limitations

Heterogeneity in study designs precluded mathematical combination of the results of the primary literature

Cite This Study

Segal et al. (2007) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a711d0331a3df82432955e3 https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.648

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Review of the Evidence on Diagnosis of Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Structured PICO

Limitations

Cite This Study

Review of the Evidence on Diagnosis of Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Structured PICO

Limitations

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider