Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia (Feb 2012)
Prevalência e preditores de embolia pulmonar em pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca agudamente descompensada Prevalence and predictors of pulmonary embolism in patients with acutely decompensated heart failure
Abstract
FUNDAMENTO: Não existe descrição da prevalência de Embolia Pulmonar (EP) em pacientes internados por quadro clássico de Insuficiência Cardíaca descompensada (IC). OBJETIVO: Em pacientes internados por IC, (1) descrever a prevalência de EP, e (2) avaliar a acurácia diagnóstica dos Escores de Wells e de Genebra. MÉTODOS: Pacientes internados primariamente por IC realizaram sistematicamente cintilografia pulmonar de ventilação/perfusão, sendo EP definida por laudo de alta probabilidade. Para fins de interpretação, definimos baixa probabilidade clínica de EP como prevalência BACKGROUND: The prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) has not been reported in patients hospitalized due to classical findings of decompensated heart failure (HF). OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence of PE and to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the Wells and Geneva scores in patients hospitalized due to HF. METHODS: Patients hospitalized primarily due to HF underwent systematic ventilation-perfusion lung scan, and PE was defined by a result of high probability. Aiming at interpreting, low clinical probability of PE was defined as prevalence < 5%, according to the literature. When calculating the sample size, 49 patients were required to provide a 95% confidence interval with ±10% accuracy, estimating an a priori prevalence of 15%. RESULTS: Of 51 patients studied, six had a high probability of PE on lung scan, resulting in 12% prevalence (95% CI = 5% - 23%). The Wells and Geneva scores had an area under the ROC curve of 0.53 (95% CI = 0.27 - 0.80; p = 0.80) and 0.43 (95% CI = 0.13 - 0.73; p = 0.56), respectively, indicating lack of accuracy for the diagnosis of PE. Alternatively, variables related to HF showed a tendency towards association with PE, and an exploratory model formed by that type of variable showed diagnostic accuracy for PE (ROC = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.66 - 0.96; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: (1) Despite the lack of primary suspicion, patients admitted with HF have intermediate clinical probability of concomitant PE; (2) the scores usually used to estimate the clinical probability of PE do not apply to the population with HF, and future predictive models should consider variables related to that syndrome.
