Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism requires clinical probability assessment. Implicit assessment is accurate but is not standardized, and current prediction rules have shortcomings. To construct a simple score based entirely on clinical variables and independent from physicians' implicit judgment. Derivation and external validation of the score in 2 independent management studies on pulmonary embolism diagnosis. Emergency departments of 3 university hospitals in Europe. Consecutive patients admitted for clinically suspected pulmonary embolism. Collected data included demographic characteristics, risk factors, and clinical signs and symptoms suggestive of venous thromboembolism. The variables statistically significantly associated with pulmonary embolism in univariate analysis were included in a multivariate logistic regression model. Points were assigned according to the regression coefficients. The score was then externally validated in an independent cohort. The score comprised 8 variables (points): age older than 65 years (1 point), previous deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism (3 points), surgery or fracture within 1 month (2 points), active malignant condition (2 points), unilateral lower limb pain (3 points), hemoptysis (2 points), heart rate of 75 to 94 beats/min (3 points) or 95 beats/min or more (5 points), and pain on lower-limb deep venous palpation and unilateral edema (4 points). In the validation set, the prevalence of pulmonary embolism was 8% in the low-probability category (0 to 3 points), 28% in the intermediate-probability category (4 to 10 points), and 74% in the high-probability category (≥11 points). Interobserver agreement for the score items was not studied. The proposed score is entirely standardized and is based on clinical variables. It has sustained internal and external validation and should now be tested for clinical usefulness in an outcome study.

Background: Whether to continue oral anticoagulant therapy beyond 6 months after an “unprovoked” venous thromboembolism is controversial. We sought to determine clinical predictors to identify patients who are at low risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism who could safely discontinue oral anticoagulants. Methods: In a multicentre prospective cohort study, 646 participants with a first, unprovoked major venous thromboembolism were enrolled over a 4-year period. Of these, 600 participants completed a mean 18-month follow-up in September 2006. We collected data for 69 potential predictors of recurrent venous thromboembolism while patients were taking oral anticoagulation therapy (5–7 months after initiation). During follow-up after discontinuing oral anticoagulation therapy, all episodes of suspected recurrent venous thromboembolism were independently adjudicated. We performed a multivariable analysis of predictor variables (p < 0.10) with high interobserver reliability to derive a clinical decision rule. Results: We identified 91 confirmed episodes of recurrent venous thromboembolism during follow-up after discontinuing oral anticoagulation therapy (annual risk 9.3%, 95% CI 7.7%–11.3%). Men had a 13.7% (95% CI 10.8%–17.0%) annual risk. There was no combination of clinical predictors that satisfied our criteria for identifying a low-risk subgroup of men. Fifty-two percent of women had 0 or 1 of the following characteristics: hyperpigmentation, edema or redness of either leg; D-dimer ≥ 250 μg/L while taking warfarin; body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m²; or age ≥ 65 years. These women had an annual risk of 1.6% (95% CI 0.3%–4.6%). Women who had 2 or more of these findings had an annual risk of 14.1% (95% CI 10.9%–17.3%). Interpretation: Women with 0 or 1 risk factor may safely discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy after 6 months of therapy following a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism. This criterion does not apply to men. (http://Clinicaltrials.gov trial register number NCT00261014)

Single-detector–row computed tomography (CT) has a low sensitivity for pulmonary embolism and must be combined with venous-compression ultrasonography of the lower limbs. We evaluated whether the use of D-dimer measurement and multidetector-row CT, without lower-limb ultrasonography, might safely rule out pulmonary embolism. We included 756 consecutive patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism from the emergency departments of three teaching hospitals and managed their cases according to a standardized sequential diagnostic strategy. All patients were followed for three months. Pulmonary embolism was detected in 194 of the 756 patients (26 percent). Among the 82 patients with a high clinical probability of pulmonary embolism, multidetector-row CT showed pulmonary embolism in 78, and 1 patient had proximal deep venous thrombosis and a CT scan that was negative for pulmonary embolism. Of the 674 patients without a high probability of pulmonary embolism, 232 (34 percent) had a negative D-dimer assay and an uneventful follow-up; CT showed pulmonary embolism in 109 patients. CT and ultrasonography were negative in 318 patients, of whom 3 had a definite thromboembolic event and 2 died of possible pulmonary embolism during follow-up (three-month risk of thromboembolism, 1.7 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.7 to 3.9). Two patients had proximal deep venous thrombosis and a negative CT scan (risk, 0.6 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.2 to 2.2). The overall three-month risk of thromboembolism in patients without pulmonary embolism would have been 1.5 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 3.0) if the D-dimer assay and multidetector-row CT had been the only tests used to rule out pulmonary embolism and ultrasonography had not been performed. Our data indicate the potential clinical use of a diagnostic strategy for ruling out pulmonary embolism on the basis of D-dimer testing and multidetector-row CT without lower-limb ultrasonography. A larger outcome study is needed before this approach can be adopted.

Case-fatality rates are important for assessing the risks and benefits of anticoagulation in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). To summarize case-fatality rates of recurrent VTE and major bleeding events during anticoagulation and recurrent VTE after anticoagulation. MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and all evidence-based medicine reviews in the Ovid interface through the second quarter of 2008. 69 articles (13 prospective cohort studies and 56 randomized, controlled trials) that reported on patients with symptomatic VTE who received anticoagulation therapy for at least 3 months and on the rate of fatal recurrent VTE and fatal major bleeding. Two reviewers independently extracted data onto standardized forms. During the initial 3 months of anticoagulation, the rate of recurrent fatal VTE was 0.4% (95% CI, 0.3% to 0.6%), with a case-fatality rate of 11.3% (CI, 8.0% to 15.2%). The rate of fatal major bleeding events was 0.2% (CI, 0.1% to 0.3%), with a case-fatality rate of 11.3% (CI, 7.5% to 15.9%). After anticoagulation, the rate of fatal recurrent VTE was 0.3 per 100 patient-years (CI, 0.1% to 0.4%), with a case-fatality rate of 3.6% (CI, 1.9% to 5.7%). Estimates come from heterogeneous trial and cohort populations and are not derived from patient-level longitudinal data. Differences in case-fatality rates during and after anticoagulation may be attributable to unmeasured patient characteristics. The case-fatality rates of recurrent VTE and major bleeding events are similar during the initial period of VTE treatment. The case-fatality rate of recurrent VTE decreases after completion of the initial period of anticoagulation. When combined with absolute rates of recurrent VTE and major bleeding events, case-fatality rates provide clinicians with a surrogate measure of mortality to balance the risks and benefits of anticoagulant therapy in patients with VTE. Canadian Institute for Health Research and Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario.

In February 2022, these guidelines were reviewed by an expert work group convened by ASH. Review included limited searches for new evidence and discussion of the search results. Following this review, the ASH Committee on Quality agreed to continue monitoring the supporting evidence rather than revise or retire these guidelines at this time. Limited searches and expert review will be repeated annually going forward until these guidelines are revised or retired.