The results of broad prospective studies lend support to the concept that clinical probability assessment is a fundamental step in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism1,2. When considered individually, symptoms, signs, or common laboratory tests have limited diagnostic power. Jointly, however, they may provide accurate assessment of the clinical probability of pulmonary embolism.
This website describes two prediction models for pulmonary embolism that have been developed at the Institute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Pisa, Italy3,4.
If a chest radiograph is available and the physician is familiar with the interpretation of it, please go to pisamodel 1 (PM1). If a chest radiograph is not available, please go to pisamodel 2 (PM2).
Both models provide online computation of the clinical probability of pulmonary embolism as a continuous function, and allow estimating precisely likelihood ratios.
Software for PM1 PM2 can be downloaded on desktop, laptop, palm computers and mobile phones.
1.Fedullo PF, Tapson VF. The evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 1247-1256.
2.Stein PD, Fowler SE, Goodman RL, Gottschalk A, Hales CA, Hull RD, Leeper KV, Popovich J, Jr, Quinn DA, Sos TA, Sostman HD, Tapson VF, Wakefield TW, Weg JG, Woodward PK, for the PIOPED II Investigators. Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 2317-2327.
3.Miniati M, Monti S, Bottai M. A structured clinical model for predicting the probability of pulmonary embolism. Am J Med 2003; 114: 173-179.
4.Miniati M, Bottai M, Monti S, Salvadori M, Serasini L, Passera M. Simple and accurate prediction of the clinical probability of pulmonary embolism. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2008; 178: 290-94.