Based on Master Nickson's comments on the PE debate, you could argue this would be an acceptable paradigm. Using Wells as your entry forces gestalt into the equation. Since Wells' low risk arguably gets you somewhere between 1-6% in ED populations, PERC should be acceptable.
Clinical Guidelines from ACP include intermediate d-dimers, age-adjusted d-dimer (Ann Intern Med 2015;163:701)
Likely pretest prob patients are ruled out by neg CTA (Safety of multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography to exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with a likely pretest clinical probability. J Thromb Haemost. 2017 Jun 2. doi: 10.1111/jth.13746.)
Normalization of Vital Signs does not reduce probability of PE (https://coreem.net/journal-reviews/vs-normalization/)
Latest posts by Scott Weingart (see all)
- EMCrit 260 – Thoughts on the NEJM Acute Upper Airway Obstruction Review - November 30, 2019
- EMCrit 259 – Cardiogenic Shock — The Next Level & Mechanical Circulatory Support with Jenelle Badulak - November 13, 2019
- Letter to the Editor – High-Sensitivity Troponin is not a Myth, and “Myth-busting” is often another Myth to be Busted - November 10, 2019