Thrombosis Journal (Jun 2024)

Validation of a pulmonary embolism risk assessment model in gynecological inpatients

  • Zhen-Yi Jin,
  • Chun-Min Li,
  • Hong Qu,
  • Wen-Tao Yang,
  • Jia-Hao Wen,
  • Hua-Liang Ren

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12959-024-00616-5
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 22, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Objective To compare the predictive efficacy of the PADUA and Caprini models for pulmonary embolism (PE) in gynecological inpatients, analyze the risk factors for PE, and validate whether both models can effectively predict mortality rates. Methods A total of 355 gynecological inpatients who underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) were included in the retrospective analysis. The comparative assessment of the predictive capabilities for PE between the PADUA and Caprini was carried out using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors associated with PE. Additionally, Kaplan–Meier survival analysis plots were generated to validate the predictive efficacy for mortality rates. Results Among 355 patients, the PADUA and Caprini demonstrated the area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.757 and 0.756, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the AUC between the two models (P = 0.9542). Multivariate logistic analysis revealed immobility (P < 0.001), history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) (P = 0.002), thrombophilia (P < 0.001), hormonal treatment (P = 0.022), and obesity (P = 0.019) as independent risk factors for PE. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis demonstrated the reliable predictive efficacy of both the Caprini (P = 0.00051) and PADUA (P = 0.00031) for mortality. ROC for the three- and six-month follow-ups suggested that the Caprini model exhibited superior predictive efficacy for mortality. Conclusions The PADUA model can serve as a simple and effective tool for stratifying high-risk gynecological inpatients before undergoing CTPA. The Caprini model demonstrated superior predictive efficacy for mortality rates.

Keywords