Abstract
Introduction: A set of scoring systems (Wells, Geneva, Revised and Simplified Geneva scores) have been developed to predict the clinical probability of pulmonary emboembolism( PE). Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index(PESI ) has also been generated in order to predict the prognosis for PE.
Aim: Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare the different clinical features, the reliability of clinical scorings used during the stage of diagnosis, the severity of the disease and prognostic indicators of PE with cancer.
Methods: Patients diagnosed with PE were included. A diagnosis of cancer classified them as Group 1 and absence of cancer classified them as Group 2. All of scoring systems were assessed.
Results: A total of 102 patients (36 with cancer) diagnosed with PE were included. The low clinical rating of scoring systems for PE patients was as SGS>RGS>Wells>GS in all patient groups. No obvious difference was found between the scoring success of groups (p>0.05). As a result of three month follow up, 22 (61%) patients in Group 1 and 10(15.1 %) patients in Group 2 were found to have died. Group 1 patients were significantly more in number among the patients who died and had low PESI scores (p=0.035)
Conclusions: In patients with cancer, GS found more successful for predicting the high risk in patients with PE. PESI scoring system was not found to be as successful as other cases in showing prognosis in patients with cancer and PE, in predicting mortality risk, thus they should be dealt and assessed separately in the stages of diagnosis and follow-up.
- Copyright ©the authors 2016