Key result
Review evaluates DVT and PE diagnostic algorithms to assess evidence robustness and knowledge gaps.
Why the study?
Many guidelines recommend diagnostic algorithms combining clinical assessment, imaging, and D-dimer testing for suspected DVT and PE, but the evidence supporting these approaches and knowledge gaps require review.
Does the use of diagnostic algorithms incorporating clinical assessment, imaging, and D-dimer testing improve the diagnosis of DVT and PE in adults?
Does the use of diagnostic algorithms incorporating clinical assessment, imaging, and D-dimer testing improve the diagnosis of DVT and PE in adults?
This review summarizes the evidence supporting the use of diagnostic algorithms incorporating clinical assessment, imaging, and D-dimer testing for suspected venous thromboembolism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Algorithms aid VTE diagnosis in adults; leaves open optimal performance and validation in key subgroups.
Wells et al. (2018) conducted a review in Suspected deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Diagnostic algorithms incorporating clinical assessment, imaging, and D-dimer testing vs. Diagnostic approaches that do not use algorithms was evaluated. Diagnostic algorithms incorporating clinical assessment, imaging, and D-dimer testing for DVT and PE in adults were reviewed to evaluate evidence robustness and identify knowledge gaps.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: