Geneva Score (revised) for PE
Assessment of clinical probability of pulmonary embolism
PE unlikely
Prevalence of PE: 12.9 %
NaN
Επιπλέον πληροφορίες
Προειδοποίηση
Αυτό το εργαλείο προορίζεται μόνο για εκπαιδευτικούς σκοπούς, δεν αντιπροσωπεύει και δεν αντικαθιστά επαγγελματικές συμβουλές. Αυτό το εργαλείο δεν πρέπει να χρησιμοποιείται για την παροχή ιατρικών διαγνώσεων ή/και ιατρικών θεραπειών.
General description
Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common cardiopulmonary emergency that is challenging to diagnose and requires a high degree of clinical suspicion. Several clinical decision rules (including Wells score and Geneva score) were developed to aid the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected PE.
In 2006, the original 3-level Geneva score was revised to include only simple clinical variables; two additional versions of the revised Geneva score were subsequently developed in order to facilitate its calculation (simplified version) and adapt it to different clinical settings (2-level version).
All versions of the revised Geneva score consist of 8 items: 4 risk factors (age, previous thrombosis, recent surgery or fracture, malignant condition), 2 symptoms (unilateral leg pain, hemoptysis), 2 clinical signs (heart rate, lower limb palpation pain). The resulting score stratifies patients into either three groups of clinical probability for PE (low, intermediate, and high) for the revised 3-level Geneva score or two groups of clinical probability (unlikely, likely) for the revised simplified 2-level Geneva score.
In general, the 3-level rule should preferably be applied in combination with highly sensitive D-dimer assays (to increase the proportion of patients in whom PE can be ruled out) and the 2-level rule can be used when only a less sensitive D-dimer test is available (to increase the diagnostic yield). D-dimer tests should not be used to rule out PE in the high clinical probability / PE likely groups.
The revised and the simplified revised Geneva scores have been externally validated and are recommended for assessment of clinical (pre-test) probability of PE by the 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism.
Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common cardiopulmonary emergency that is challenging to diagnose and requires a high degree of clinical suspicion. Several clinical decision rules (including Wells score and Geneva score) were developed to aid the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected PE.
In 2006, the original 3-level Geneva score was revised to include only simple clinical variables; two additional versions of the revised Geneva score were subsequently developed in order to facilitate its calculation (simplified version) and adapt it to different clinical settings (2-level version).
All versions of the revised Geneva score consist of 8 items: 4 risk factors (age, previous thrombosis, recent surgery or fracture, malignant condition), 2 symptoms (unilateral leg pain, hemoptysis), 2 clinical signs (heart rate, lower limb palpation pain). The resulting score stratifies patients into either three groups of clinical probability for PE (low, intermediate, and high) for the revised 3-level Geneva score or two groups of clinical probability (unlikely, likely) for the revised simplified 2-level Geneva score.
In general, the 3-level rule should preferably be applied in combination with highly sensitive D-dimer assays (to increase the proportion of patients in whom PE can be ruled out) and the 2-level rule can be used when only a less sensitive D-dimer test is available (to increase the diagnostic yield). D-dimer tests should not be used to rule out PE in the high clinical probability / PE likely groups.
The revised and the simplified revised Geneva scores have been externally validated and are recommended for assessment of clinical (pre-test) probability of PE by the 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism.
Result ranges for the 3-level revised Geneva score
Low clinical probability of PE
Prevalence of PE: 8 %
≤ 3Prevalence of PE: 8 %
Intermediate clinical probability of PE
Prevalence of PE: 28 %
4–10Prevalence of PE: 28 %
High clinical probability of PE
Prevalence of PE: 74 %
≥ 11Prevalence of PE: 74 %
PE: pulmonary embolism
Result ranges for the 2-level simplified revised Geneva score
PE unlikely
Prevalence of PE: 12.9 %
≤ 2Prevalence of PE: 12.9 %
PE likely
Prevalence of PE: 41.6 %
≥ 3Prevalence of PE: 41.6 %
PE: pulmonary embolism
References
Le Gal, Grégoire et al. “Prediction of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: the revised Geneva score.” Annals of internal medicine vol. 144,3 (2006): 165-71. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-3-200602070-00004
Klok, Frederikus A et al. “Simplification of the revised Geneva score for assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism.” Archives of internal medicine vol. 168,19 (2008): 2131-6. doi:10.1001/archinte.168.19.2131
Konstantinides, Stavros V et al. “2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European Respiratory Society (ERS): The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).” The European respiratory journal vol. 54,3 1901647. 9 Oct. 2019, doi:10.1183/13993003.01647-2019
Ceriani, E et al. “Clinical prediction rules for pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH vol. 8,5 (2010): 957-70. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2010.03801.x
Έκδοση
1
Σχετικά με αυτό το εργαλείο
Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common cardiopulmonary emergency that is challenging to diagnose and requires a high degree of clinical suspicion. Several clinical decision rules (including Wells score and Geneva score) were developed to aid the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected PE.
In 2006, the original 3-level Geneva score was revised to include only simple clinical variables; two additional versions of the revised Geneva score were subsequently developed in order to facilitate its calculation (simplified version) and adapt it to different clinical settings (2-level version).
All versions of the revised Geneva score consist of 8 items: 4 risk factors (age, previous thrombosis, recent surgery or fracture, malignant condition), 2 symptoms (unilateral leg pain, hemoptysis), 2 clinical signs (heart rate, lower limb palpation pain). The resulting score stratifies patients into either three groups of clinical probability for PE (low, intermediate, and high) for the revised 3-level Geneva score or two groups of clinical probability (unlikely, likely) for the revised simplified 2-level Geneva score.
In general, the 3-level rule should preferably be applied in combination with highly sensitive D-dimer assays (to increase the proportion of patients in whom PE can be ruled out) and the 2-level rule can be used when only a less sensitive D-dimer test is available (to increase the diagnostic yield). D-dimer tests should not be used to rule out PE in the high clinical probability / PE likely groups.
The revised and the simplified revised Geneva scores have been externally validated and are recommended for assessment of clinical (pre-test) probability of PE by the 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism.
In 2006, the original 3-level Geneva score was revised to include only simple clinical variables; two additional versions of the revised Geneva score were subsequently developed in order to facilitate its calculation (simplified version) and adapt it to different clinical settings (2-level version).
All versions of the revised Geneva score consist of 8 items: 4 risk factors (age, previous thrombosis, recent surgery or fracture, malignant condition), 2 symptoms (unilateral leg pain, hemoptysis), 2 clinical signs (heart rate, lower limb palpation pain). The resulting score stratifies patients into either three groups of clinical probability for PE (low, intermediate, and high) for the revised 3-level Geneva score or two groups of clinical probability (unlikely, likely) for the revised simplified 2-level Geneva score.
In general, the 3-level rule should preferably be applied in combination with highly sensitive D-dimer assays (to increase the proportion of patients in whom PE can be ruled out) and the 2-level rule can be used when only a less sensitive D-dimer test is available (to increase the diagnostic yield). D-dimer tests should not be used to rule out PE in the high clinical probability / PE likely groups.
The revised and the simplified revised Geneva scores have been externally validated and are recommended for assessment of clinical (pre-test) probability of PE by the 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism.
