@article{article_532339, title={Efficiacy of Wells score and Pulmonary Embolism Rule Out Criteria(PERC) to exclude pulmonary embolism in a pulmonary emergency ward}, journal={Turkish Journal of Clinics and Laboratory}, volume={11}, pages={12–17}, year={2020}, DOI={10.18663/tjcl.532339}, author={Akın Kabalak, Pınar and Çiçek, Tuğba and Çiçek, Ömer Faruk and Kızılgöz, Derya and Yılmaz, Ülkü}, keywords={Wells,PERC,Pulmoner embolizm}, abstract={ Aim: The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC) rule is a diagnostic algorithm to exclude pulmonary embolism (PE). Even it is not widely used in routine practice, has better negative predictive value in low-risk populations among existed clinical assessment tests. We aimed to examine availability of PERC rules combined with Wells score in a pulmonary emergency ward. Material and Methods: A retrospective hospitalized database study was conducted with 163 patients. All patients who underwent radiological investigation due to suspicious for PE were included. We calculated prevalence of PE in group of PERC negative and PERC positive. All PERC parameters were evaluated solely for risk of PE. Results: PERC positivity was 82.4% in patients diagnosed with PE. There were no significant differences in terms of PERC positivity between PE+ and PE- groups (p=0.336). False positivity rate for moderate to high Wells score was 36.1%. Frequency of PERC negativity among PE negative patients was only %36.1 and %17.6 in PE positive group (p=0.75 and r=-0.025). The sensitivity of the PERC test was 82.3%, specificity 19.6%, PPV 63.1%, NPV 40%, false positivity rate 36.8% and false negativity rate 60%. Among patients with moderate to high wells, 61 patients were diagnosed PE and 14 of them were PERC negative. Conclusion: Our study suggests that PERC scoring system even combined with Wells score does not sufficient enough to prevent unnecessary irradiative imaging studies in a pulmonary emergency ward. }, number={2}, publisher={DNT Ortadoğu Yayıncılık A.Ş.}