The utility of risk assessment tools for acute pulmonary embolism in children.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially life-threatening disease in children. The objective of the study is to evaluate the utility of adult-based pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC), Pediatric PE Model, and D-dimer in the diagnosis of PE in children. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study consisted of patients under 18 years of age who were consulted to the Pediatric Pulmonology Clinic for the evaluation of PE. Patients were divided into two groups based on the confirmation of PE. The group with the presence of PE (n = 20) consisted of children who were diagnosed with PE. The group with the absence of PE (n = 28) consisted of children with clinically suspected PE but negative diagnostic imaging. Adult validated clinical decision PERC rule and Pediatric PE Model were retrospectively applied to the patients. RESULTS: In the study, PERC demonstrated a sensitivity of 60% and a specificity of 46% for the diagnosis of PE in children. When PE Model was evaluated for the children, it was found a 50% sensitivity and 75% specificity. Combining PE Model and PERC rule with D-dimer did not increase the specificity and sensitivity. Smoking was found to be relevant for PE in the childhood. Twenty-five percent of the patients had a genetic tendency for PE. All of the patients had an underlying disease as well. CONCLUSION: None of the current risk assessment tools (PE Model, PERC, D-dimer) were found to be accurate in predicting PE. Further larger population studies are still required to develop a better diagnostic approach.