摘要
Aims: To validate a model for quantifying the prognosis of patients with pulmonary embolism(PE). The model was previously derived from 10 534 US patients. Methods and results: We validated the model in 367 patients prospectively diagnosed with PE at 117 European emergency departments. We used baseline data for the model’ s 11 prognostic variables to stratify patients into five risk classes(I- V). We compared 90- day mortality within each risk class and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between the validation and the original derivation samples. We also assessed the rate of recurrent venous thrombo- embolism and major bleeding within each risk class. Mortality was 0% in Risk Class I, 1.0% in Class II, 3.1% in Class III, 10.4% in Class IV, and 24.4% in Class V and did not differ between the validation and the original derivation samples. The area under the curve was larger in the validation sample(0.87 vs. 0.78, P=0.01). No patients in Classes I and II developed recurrent thrombo- embolism or major bleeding. Conclusion: The model accurately stratifies patients with PE into categories of increasing risk of mortality and other relevant complications. Patients in Risk Classes I and II are at low risk of adverse outcomes and are potential candidates for outpatient treatment.
Aims： To validate a model for quantifying the prognosis of patients with pulmonary embolism（PE） The model was previously derived from 10 534 US patients. Methods and results： We validated the model in 367 patients prospectively diagnosed with PE at 117 European emergency departments. We used baseline data for the model＇s 11 prognostic variables to stratify patients into five risk classes （Ⅰ -Ⅴ） . We compared 90-day mortality within each risk class and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between the validation and the original derivation samples. We also assessed the rate of recurrent venous thrombo-embolism and major bleeding within each risk class. Mortality was 0% in Risk Class Ⅰ, 1.0% in Class Ⅱ, 3. 1% in Class Ⅲ, 10. 4% in Class Ⅳ, and 24. 4% in Class Ⅴ and did not differ between the validation and the original derivation samples. The area under the curve was larger in the validation sample（0. 87 vs. 0. 78, P = 0. 01 ）. No patients in Classes Ⅰ and Ⅱ developed recurrent thrombe-embolism or major bleeding.
