RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To compare the severity of pulmonary embolism (PE) and the long-term complications between patients with and without COVID-19, and to investigate whether the tools for risk stratification of death are valid in this population. METHODS: We retrospectively included hospitalized patients with PE from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2022. Comparisons for acute episode characteristics, risk stratification of the PE, outcomes, and long-term complications were made between COVID and non-COVID patients. RESULTS: We analyzed 116 (27.5%) COVID patients and 305 (72.4%) non-COVID patients. In patients with COVID-19, the traditional risk factors for PE were absent, and the incidence of deep vein thrombosis was lower. COVID patients showed significantly higher lymphocyte count, lactate dehydrogenase, lactic acid, and D-dimer levels. COVID patients had PE of smaller size (12.3% vs. 25.5% main pulmonary artery, 29.8% vs. 37.1% lobar, 44.7% vs. 29.5% segmental and 13.2% vs. 7.9% subsegmental, respectively; p < 0.001), less right ventricular dysfunction (7.7% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.007) and higher sPESI score (1.66 vs. 1.11; p < 0.001). The need for mechanical ventilation was significantly higher in COVID patients (8.6% vs. 1.3%; p < 0.001); However, the in-hospital death was less (5.2% vs. 10.8%; p = 0.074). The incidence of long-term complications was lower in COVID cohort (p < 0.001). PE severity assessed by high sPESI and intermediate and high-risk categories were independently associated with in-hospital mortality in COVID patients. CONCLUSION: The risk of in-hospital mortality and the incidence of long-term complications were lower in COVID-19. The usual tools for risk stratification of PE are valid in COVID patients.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Embolia Pulmonar , Humanos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , COVID-19/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Embolia Pulmonar/complicaciones , Arteria Pulmonar , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
Background and objective: Clinical prediction models determine the pre-test probability of pulmonary embolism (PE) and assess the need for tests for these patients. Coronavirus infection is associated with a greater risk of PE, increasing its severity and conferring a worse prognosis. The pathogenesis of PE appears to be different in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. This systematic review aims to discover the utility of probability models developed for PE in patients with COVID-19 by reviewing the available literature. Methods: A literature search on the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases was carried out. All studies that reported data on the use of clinical prediction models for PE in patients with COVID-19 were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized studies. Results: Thirteen studies that evaluated five prediction models (Wells score, Geneva score, YEARS algorithm, and PERC and PEGeD clinical decision rules) were included. The different scales were used in 1,187 patients with COVID-19. Overall, the models showed limited predictive ability. The two-level Wells score with low (or unlikely) clinical probability in combination with a D-dimer level < 3000 ng/mL or a normal bedside lung ultrasound showed an adequate correlation for ruling out PE. Conclusions: Our systematic review suggests that the clinical prediction models available for PE that were developed in the general population are not applicable to patients with COVID-19. Therefore, their use is in clinical practice as the only diagnostic screening tool is not recommended. New clinical probability models for PE that are validated in these patients are needed.
RESUMEN
Recent studies suggest that thrombotic complications are a common phenomenon in the novel SARS-CoV-2 infection. The main objective of our study is to assess cumulative incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in non critically ill COVID-19 patients and to identify its predicting factors associated to the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. We retrospectevely reviewed 452 electronic medical records of patients admitted to Internal Medicine Department of a secondary hospital in Madrid during Covid 19 pandemic outbreak. We included 91 patients who underwent a multidetector Computed Tomography pulmonary angiography(CTPA) during conventional hospitalization. The cumulative incidence of PE was assessed ant the clinical, analytical and radiological characteristics were compared between patients with and without PE. PE incidence was 6.4% (29/452 patients). Most patients with a confirmed diagnosed with PE recieved low molecular weight heparin (LMWH): 79.3% (23/29). D-dimer peak was significatly elevated in PE vs non PE patients (14,480 vs 7230 mcg/dL, p = 0.03). In multivariate analysis of patients who underwent a CTPA we found that plasma D-dimer peak was an independen predictor of PE with a best cut off point of > 5000 µg/dl (OR 3.77; IC95% (1.18-12.16), p = 0.03). We found ninefold increased risk of PE patients not suffering from dyslipidemia (OR 9.06; IC95% (1.88-43.60). Predictive value of AUC for ROC is 75.5%. We found a high incidence of PE in non critically ill hospitalized COVID 19 patients despite standard thromboprophylaxis. An increase in D-dimer levels is an independent predictor for PE, with a best cut-off point of > 5000 µg/ dl.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Quimioprevención , Pulmón , Embolia Pulmonar , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/fisiopatología , Causalidad , Quimioprevención/métodos , Quimioprevención/estadística & datos numéricos , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada/métodos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Productos de Degradación de Fibrina-Fibrinógeno/análisis , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Incidencia , Pulmón/irrigación sanguínea , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Embolia Pulmonar/sangre , Embolia Pulmonar/diagnóstico por imagen , Embolia Pulmonar/epidemiología , Embolia Pulmonar/etiología , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , España/epidemiología , Trombofilia/diagnóstico , Trombofilia/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Since the identification of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, there have been significant advances in its diagnosis and treatment, but there have been few contributions to the area of care quality. In 2010, the Spanish AIDS Study Group (GeSIDA) published the document "Health quality indicators of GeSIDA for the care of people infected with HIV/AIDS" in which standards are proposed for the purpose of improving and standardizing the assistance provided to people infected with HIV. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree of compliance with these indicators and to analyse whether adherence to the standards improves patient perception of care quality in terms of their satisfaction with the health care they have received. METHODS: Compliance with GeSIDA indicators was analysed within a cohort of people living with HIV (PLHIV) in a hospital in the Madrid region. To evaluate patient perception, the External Consultation User Satisfaction Questionnaire (SUCE) was used, which is a tool that was previously validated in the Spanish population. RESULTS: A total of 334 patients were included. The level of adherence to the indicators was 74.46%. The score on the SUCE questionnaire was 9.04 out of 10 (CI 95%: 8.90-9.19). Of the 47 indicators assessed, only 4 were related to satisfaction with health care. CONCLUSIONS: The levels of compliance with the indicators and patient satisfaction with health care were high. Adherence to quality indicators showed little relation to patient-reported satisfaction.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por VIH/terapia , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Satisfacción del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud/normas , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Infecciones por VIH/psicología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Calidad de Vida , EspañaRESUMEN
Cancer is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism of four to sixfold. Cancer-related interventions such as chemotherapy, hormonal therapy and indwelling central venous catheters also increase the risk of venous thromboembolism. Low molecular weight heparin for at least 3-6 months is the current standard of care for the treatment of cancer associated venous thromboembolism. Anticoagulation should be continued as long as the cancer is active. Over the past few years, direct oral anticoagulants have emerged, including one direct thrombin inhibitor (dabigatran etexilate) and three factor Xa inhibitors (apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban). In the randomized controlled trials comparing direct oral anticoagulants with vitamin K antagonists, the direct oral anticoagulants all provide non-inferior in prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation, for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism and in acute coronary syndrome. In people with cancer, these drugs have emerged as attractive alternatives for the treatment of venous thromboembolism with the potential to overcome the limitations of low molecular weight heparin. Randomized controlled studies comparing direct oral anticoagulants to low molecular weight heparin in cancer patients are still limited and direct oral anticoagulants are not recommended for the treatment of cancer associated venous thromboembolism yet. However, new emerging data are supporting the use of direct oral anticoagulants in cancer-associated thrombosis. Here, we review recent data on the evidence related to the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores del Factor Xa/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Trombosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores del Factor Xa/farmacología , Heparina de Bajo-Peso-Molecular/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Trombosis/etiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Vitamina K/antagonistas & inhibidoresRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Data from phase 2 clinical trials suggest that factor XI inhibitors may exhibit a more favorable efficacy/safety profile compared to current antithrombotic therapies. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the available evidence derived from these studies. METHODS: A literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, EMBASE databases, and clinical trial registration platforms Clinical Trials and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled was conducted. In accordance with the PRISMA statement, results were reported. RESULTS: A total of 18 completed or ongoing clinical trials addressing multiple scenarios, including atrial fibrillation, stroke, myocardial infarction, and venous thromboembolism, were identified. Evidence from 8 studies with available results was analyzed. Phase 2 studies with factor XI inhibitors, overall, demonstrated an acceptable efficacy and safety profile. The benefit-risk balance, in terms of reducing venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, was more favorable. For this scenario, factor XI inhibitors showed a 50% reduction in the overall rate of thrombotic complications and a 60% reduction in the rate of bleeding compared to enoxaparin. Modest results in studies involving patients with atrial fibrillation, stroke, and myocardial infarction were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Factor XI inhibitors offer new prospects in antithrombotic treatment and prophylaxis. Ongoing phase 3 studies will help define the most suitable drugs and indications.
Asunto(s)
Factor XI , Fibrinolíticos , Humanos , Factor XI/antagonistas & inhibidores , Fibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Fibrinolíticos/efectos adversos , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Infarto del Miocardio , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Ensayos Clínicos Fase II como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Clinical prediction models determine the pre-test probability of pulmonary embolism (PE) and assess the need for tests for these patients. Coronavirus infection is associated with a greater risk of PE, increasing its severity and conferring a worse prognosis. The pathogenesis of PE appears to be different in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. This systematic review aims to discover the utility of probability models developed for PE in patients with COVID-19 by reviewing the available literature. METHODS: A literature search on the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases was carried out. All studies that reported data on the use of clinical prediction models for PE in patients with COVID-19 were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized studies. RESULTS: Thirteen studies that evaluated five prediction models (Wells score, Geneva score, YEARS algorithm, and PERC and PEGeD clinical decision rules) were included. The different scales were used in 1,187 patients with COVID-19. Overall, the models showed limited predictive ability. The two-level Wells score with low (or unlikely) clinical probability in combination with a D-dimer level <3000ng/mL or a normal bedside lung ultrasound showed an adequate correlation for ruling out PE. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review suggests that the clinical prediction models available for PE that were developed in the general population are not applicable to patients with COVID-19. Therefore, their use is in clinical practice as the only diagnostic screening tool is not recommended. New clinical probability models for PE that are validated in these patients are needed.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Embolia Pulmonar , Humanos , COVID-19/complicaciones , SARS-CoV-2 , Embolia Pulmonar/diagnóstico , Probabilidad , Pronóstico , Prueba de COVID-19Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular/complicaciones , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/diagnóstico , Hemofilia A/complicaciones , Hemofilia A/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/complicaciones , Neoplasias Hepáticas/diagnóstico , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/sangre , Factor VIII/metabolismo , Hemofilia A/sangre , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/sangre , MasculinoRESUMEN
For patients with idiopathic venous thromboembolism (unprovoked), the risk of recurrence is high. Secondary prophylaxis with anticoagulant therapy reduces the thrombotic risk but at the expense of an increased risk of haemorrhage. A number of factors, such as the male sex and an increase in dimer-D concentrations after completing the anticoagulation therapy, are associated with an increased risk of recurrence. Other factors such as residual venous thrombosis have a more controversial and sometimes contradictory relationship. A number of models have been proposed for predicting thrombotic recurrence risk after anticoagulation therapy in unprovoked TVD. However, these models need external validation to determine their current usefulness in clinical practice. In this article, we analyse the risk factors for thrombotic recurrence and the existing prediction models.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE), the optimal duration of anticoagulation is anchored on estimating the risk of disease recurrence. We aimed to develop a simple risk assessment model that improves prediction of the recurrence risk. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, 398 patients with a first unprovoked VTE were followed up for a median of 21.3months after discontinuation of anticoagulation. We excluded patients with a strong thrombophilic defect. Preselected clinical and laboratory variables were analyzed based on the independent confirmation of the impact on the recurrence risk, simplicity of assessment, and reproducibility. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to develop a recurrence score that was subsequently internally validated by bootstrap analysis. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients (16.3%) had recurrent VTE. In all patients, VTE recurred spontaneously. Male sex (HR=2.89 [95% CI 1.21-6.90] P=0.016), age (HR=1.0310 per additional decade [95% CI 1.01-1.07] P=0.011), obesity (HR=3.92 [95% CI 1.75-8.75] P=0.0001), varicose veins (HR=4.14 [95% CI 1.81-9.43] P=0.0001), abnormal D-dimer during anticoagulation (HR=13.66 [95% CI 4.74-39.37] P=0.0001), high factor VIII coagulant activity (HR=1.01 [95% CI 1.00-1.02] P=0.028) and heterozygous of factor V Leiden and/or Prothrombin G20210A mutation (HR=13.86 [95% CI 5.87-32.75] P=0.0001) were related to a higher recurrence risk. Using these variables, we developed a nomogram [hereafter referred to as DAMOVES score (D-dimer, Age, Mutation, Obesity, Varicose veins, Eight, Sex)] for prediction of recurrence in an individual patient. CONCLUSIONS: The DAMOVES score can be used to predict recurrence risk in patients with a first unprovoked VTE and may be useful to decide whether anticoagulant therapy should be continued indefinitely or stopped after an initial treatment period of at least 3months.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Esquema de Medicación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Estudios Prospectivos , Curva ROC , Recurrencia , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Factores de Riesgo , Factores Sexuales , EspañaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Bacteremia remains one of the most relevant problems in infectious disease. The interest of this study was to know the presentation and development pattern of bacteremia in our environment, in order to best prevent and treat this entity. PATIENTS AND METHOD: A retrospective, no interventional study, on significant bacteremia detected in the Service of Internal Medicine of a secondary level hospital over three years was carried out. Through the study length, from January 1 2001 until December 31 2003, 4,719 blood cultures were processed by the Service of Microbiology; of these, 1964 (41.6%) were submitted by the Service of Internal Medicine. Results were positive in 336 (17.1%); of these, 18 (24.1%) correlated with episodes of true bacteremia, and 255 (75.9%) were deemed as contaminations. RESULTS: Overall, 81 episodes of true bacteremia were studied, from 77 patients (4 patients presented with 2 episodes). An incidence rate of 28.25 episodes per 1000 hospital admissions was estimated. Mean age was 72 years (95% CI: 68.62-75.38). Males over 60 years-old were predominant (51.9%). Bacteremia was community-acquired in 75.3% of cases, and nosocomial in 24.7%. Commonest baseline diseases were elevated arterial blood pressure and diabetes mellitus. Bacteremia development was mostly related to genitourinary and vascular handling. Most of them were nephrourological (42.0%), respiratory (19.8%) and abdominal (13.6%) in origin. In our environment, Escherichia coli (33.0%) and Staphylococcus coagulase-negative (15.9%) were the most commonly isolated pathogens. Empiric antibiotic therapy was correct in 86.2% of cases; third generation cephalosporins were the most used. Overall mortality rate was 16% (13 patients), and bacteraemia-related mortality was 61%. CONCLUSIONS: A high incidence of bacteremia episodes is noteworthy, as compared with series from other centers. The percentage of episodes due to Staphylococcus coagulase-negative was significant, as it is the rule in recent years; thus, a thoroughly assessment of potential contaminants, as well as staff training in extraction techniques becomes necessary.
Asunto(s)
Bacteriemia/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Bacteriemia/microbiología , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/epidemiología , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/microbiología , Comorbilidad , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/microbiología , Infecciones por Escherichia coli/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones por Escherichia coli/epidemiología , Infecciones por Escherichia coli/microbiología , Femenino , Departamentos de Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Incidencia , Medicina Interna , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , España/epidemiología , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/epidemiología , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/microbiologíaRESUMEN
No disponible
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Infecciones por Coronavirus/fisiopatología , Síndrome Respiratorio Agudo Grave/fisiopatología , Embolia Pulmonar/fisiopatología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/complicaciones , Coronavirus Relacionado al Síndrome Respiratorio Agudo Severo/patogenicidad , Neumonía Viral/complicaciones , Embolia Pulmonar/etiología , Factores de Riesgo , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/complicacionesRESUMEN
Antecedentes y objetivo La información proveniente de los ensayos clínicos fase 2 sugiere que los inhibidores del factor XI podrían mostrar un perfil de eficacia/seguridad más favorable que las terapias antitrombóticas actuales. El objetivo de esta revisión sistemática es analizar la evidencia disponible derivada de esos estudios. Métodos Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en las bases de datos PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus y EMBASE, y en las plataformas de registro de ensayos clínicos Clinical Trials y Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Los resultados se publicaron según la declaración PRISMA. Resultados Se identificaron un total de 18 ensayos clínicos concluidos o en curso abordando múltiples escenarios, incluyendo fibrilación auricular, ictus, infarto de miocardio y tromboembolismo venoso. Se analizó la evidencia procedente de 8 estudios con resultados disponibles. En general, los estudios fase 2 con inhibidores del factor XI mostraron un perfil adecuado de eficacia y seguridad. El balance beneficio/riesgo fue más favorable en términos de reducción de tromboembolismo venoso en pacientes sometidos a artroplastia total de rodilla. Para esta indicación, los inhibidores del factor XI mostraron una reducción global del 50% en la tasa de complicaciones trombóticas y del 60% en la tasa de hemorragias comparado con enoxaparina. En los estudios de pacientes con fibrilación auricular, ictus e infarto de miocardio se observaron resultados más modestos. Conclusión Los inhibidores del Factor XI abren nuevas perspectivas en el tratamiento y la profilaxis antitrombótica. Los estudios fase 3 en curso permitirán definir los fármacos e indicaciones más idóneas. (AU)
Background and objective Data from phase 2 clinical trials suggest that factor XI inhibitors may exhibit a more favourable efficacy/safety profile than current antithrombotic therapies. This systematic review aims to analyze the available evidence derived from these studies. Methods A literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, EMBASE databases, and clinical trial registration platforms Clinical Trials and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled was conducted. The results were reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Results A total of 18 completed or ongoing clinical trials addressing multiple scenarios, including atrial fibrillation, stroke, myocardial infarction, and venous thromboembolism, were identified. Evidence from 8 studies with available results was analyzed. Overall, phase 2 studies with factor XI inhibitors demonstrated an acceptable efficacy and safety profile. The benefit-risk balance, in terms of reducing venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, was more favourable. For this scenario, factor XI inhibitors showed a 50% reduction in the overall rate of thrombotic complications and a 60% reduction in bleeding compared to enoxaparin. Modest results in studies involving patients with atrial fibrillation, stroke, and myocardial infarction were observed. Conclusions Factor XI inhibitors offer new prospects in antithrombotic treatment and prevention. Ongoing phase 3 studies will help define the most suitable drugs and indications. (AU)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Factor XI/antagonistas & inhibidores , Fibrinolíticos , Trombosis/terapia , HemorragiaRESUMEN
Antecedentes y objetivo Las escalas de predicción clínica para embolia de pulmón (EP) determinan la probabilidad pretest y valoran la necesidad de las pruebas para estos pacientes. La infección por coronavirus se asocia a un mayor riesgo de EP, aumentando su gravedad y confiriendo un peor pronóstico. La patogénesis de la EP parece ser diferente en pacientes con y sin infección por SARS-CoV-2. Esta revisión sistemática pretende conocer, revisando la bibliografía disponible, la utilidad de los modelos predictivos desarrollados para EP en pacientes con COVID-19. Métodos Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en las bases de datos de PubMed, Scopus y EMBASE, incluyendo todos los estudios que comunican datos relacionados con la aplicación de escalas de predicción clínica para EP en pacientes con COVID-19. La calidad de los estudios se evaluó con la escala Newcastle-Ottawa para estudios no aleatorizados. Resultados Se incluyeron 13 estudios de cohortes que evaluaron cinco modelos predictivos (escala de Wells, puntuación de Ginebra, algoritmo YEARS y las reglas de decisión clínica PERC y PEGeD). Las diversas escalas se aplicaron en 1.187 pacientes con COVID-19. En general, los modelos tuvieron una capacidad predictiva limitada. La escala de Wells de dos categorías con probabilidad clínica baja (o improbable) en combinación con un dímero D<3.000ng/mL o con una ecografía pulmonar a pie de cama normal mostraron una adecuada correlación para excluir la EP. Conclusión Nuestra revisión sistemática sugiere que las escalas de predicción disponibles para EP desarrolladas en población general no son aplicables a los pacientes con COVID-19, por lo que, de momento, no se recomienda su uso en la práctica clínica como única herramienta de cribado diagnóstico. Se necesitan nuevas escalas de probabilidad clínica para EP validadas en estos pacientes (AU)
Background and objective Clinical prediction models determine the pre-test probability of pulmonary embolism (PE) and assess the need for tests for these patients. Coronavirus infection is associated with a greater risk of PE, increasing its severity and conferring a worse prognosis. The pathogenesis of PE appears to be different in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. This systematic review aims to discover the utility of probability models developed for PE in patients with COVID-19 by reviewing the available literature. Method A literature search on the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases was carried out. All studies that reported data on the use of clinical prediction models for PE in patients with COVID-19 were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized studies. Results Thirteen studies that evaluated five prediction models (Wells score, Geneva score, YEARS algorithm, and PERC and PEGeD clinical decision rules) were included. The different scales were used in 1,187 patients with COVID-19. Overall, the models showed limited predictive ability. The two-level Wells score with low (or unlikely) clinical probability in combination with a D-dimer level <3000ng/mL or a normal bedside lung ultrasound showed an adequate correlation for ruling out PE. Conclusions Our systematic review suggests that the clinical prediction models available for PE that were developed in the general population are not applicable to patients with COVID-19. Therefore, their use is in clinical practice as the only diagnostic screening tool is not recommended. New clinical probability models for PE that are validated in these patients are needed (AU)