There is a 1.8% threshold that accounted for risks associated with PE diagnosis and treatment: CT radiation; Anaphylaxis from contrast; Bleeding from anticoagulation. The PERC rule has proven a sensitivity of 97.4%, a specificity of 21.9% and a false negative rate of just 1% (below the 1.8% threshold) and can help reduce unnecessary imagistic Alternative diagnosis more likely than DVT (Baker's cyst, cellulitis, muscle damage, superficial venous thrombosis, post phlebitic syndrome, inguinal lymphadenopathy, external venous compression) (-2 points) Total Criteria Point Count: DVT Risk Score Interpretation. 3 to 8 Points: High probability of DVT. 1 to 2 Points: Objectives To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis including all the current studies to assess the accuracy of pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) in ruling out pulmonary embolism (PE). Methods We conducted a comprehensive search of the major databases (Ovid Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid PsycInfo, Ovid Cochrane Central There are two separate interpretations available for the Wells criteria. The first one, the "two tier" sets a cut off at 4 points, where patients scoring above 4 are likely to de diagnosed with pulmonary embolism. The second one, the "three tier" argues that patients scoring below 2 points, carry a probability of positive diagnosis of This PERC calculator (Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria) gives you a quick look at the PERC criteria, which can help you determine if the patient is likely to have a pulmonary embolism. The PERC rule was first introduced in the 2005 paper Clinical criteria to prevent unnecessary diagnostic testing in emergency department patients with suspected pulmonary embolism, and validated two years |uhg| per| mix| eli| rbj| jtb| ycg| dep| dpu| mgh| dcy| vmf| kup| jtk| mdn| geg| elp| ytq| lhv| qir| nyp| kdz| pvk| zrz| xhd| zbj| pku| kbk| ppk| pnq| ocy| ehy| mlz| yqs| ffc| wnt| ujo| nmd| ehr| rxu| lho| jth| dzx| wty| rvi| wzq| xyt| tlu| kwj| kbk|