The pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC; Table 1) rule was created to exclude
pulmonary embolism (PE) without further examinations, by selecting patients with very
low pretest probability (< 2%). Its clinical usefulness is currently not confirmed
in European studies with high PE prevalence, even when combined with low clinical
probability assessed by revised Geneva score. Our objective was to compare the performances
of PERC rule combined with low clinical probability assessed by revised Geneva score,
Wells score, or the clinician gestalt in a European population with a high prevalence
of PE.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Emergency MedicineAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2011 Published by Elsevier Inc.
