Adherence to the algorithmic approach for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A teaching hospital experience, Shiraz, Iran

BACKGROUND We evaluated to see if the algorithmic approach of pulmonary embolism (PE) [Wells’ score, followed by D-dimer test and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA)] is appropriately followed in teaching hospitals of Shiraz, Iran.METHODS From October 2012 to October 2013, we prospectively calculated Wells’ score for all patients who underwent CTPA with clinical suspicion to PE; patients with low probability who had not checked the D-dimer or had low level of D-dimer were considered as non-adherent to the guideline and those with high level of D-dimer or high probability of Wells’ score were labeled as adherent to the PE guideline. CTPA scans were independently reported by two radiologists.RESULTS During study period, 364 patients underwent CTPA to rule out PE, of which 125 (34.3%) had Wells’ score > 4 (high probable risk) and 239 had Wells’ score ≤ 4. Amongst low probable risk patients (Wells’ score ≤ 4), only 32 patients had undergone the D-dimer test (23 patients had high level of D-dimer). Based on the algorithmic approach, patients with suspected PE, patients with high probability (125 patients), and patients with low probability with elevated D-dimer level(23 patients) were considered as adherent to the PE guideline; consequently, the total adherence to PE guideline was 148 out of 364 (40.6%).CONCLUSION We followed the algorithmic approach guideline in about 40.0% of cases; however, we should pay more attention to the algorithmic approach in patients with suspected PE.