Why the study?
Does the Wells clinical prediction rule combined with normal D-dimer testing safely exclude pulmonary embolism in older ambulatory adults?
Does the Wells clinical prediction rule combined with normal D-dimer testing safely exclude pulmonary embolism in older ambulatory adults?
The Wells clinical prediction rule combined with D-dimer testing has an unacceptably high failure rate (5.9%) and does not safely exclude pulmonary embolism in older unhospitalized adults.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Questions safety of Wells plus D-dimer for excluding PE in older outpatients; leaves open need for age-adjusted thresholds and prospective validation.
Schouten et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: