Síguenos en Twitter     Síguenos en Facebook     Síguenos en Google+     Síguenos en YouTube     Siguenos en Linkedin     Correo Grupsagessa     Gmail     Yahoo Mail     Dropbox     Instagram     Pinterest     Slack     Google Drive     Reddit     StumbleUpon     Print


Mi foto
FACP. Colegio de médicos de Tarragona Nº 4305520 / fgcapriles@gmail.com


STEMI Equivalents

Buscar en contenido


martes, 9 de junio de 2015


Resultado de imagen de clinical ultrasound journal
Squizzato et al. Critical Ultrasound Journal (2015) 7:7 DOI 10.1186/s13089-015-0025-5
The best diagnostic strategy to confirm or exclude pulmonary embolism (PE) suspicion needs an appropriate combination of clinical assessment, plasma D-dimer measurement, and computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA). CTPA should be used with caution in some patient groups, such as patients with known allergy to contrast media, those with severe renal insufficiency, and pregnant women, and could be not immediately available in case of unstable patients. In the emergency setting, alternative diagnostic strategies should be implemented to overcome CTPA limitations. Ultrasonography is certainly a valuable alternative diagnostic tool. In addition to echocardiography and lower limb compressive venous ultrasonography, lung ultrasound (US) may play an important role in selected patients’ subgroups. Recent data on the diagnostic performance of a triple point-of-care US (lung, heart, and leg vein US) are discussed in the present paper, and pros and cons of triple point-of-care US are compared with those of standard diagnostic approaches. 
Keywords: Pulmonary embolism diagnosis; Venous thromboembolism; Point-of-care ultrasound; Lung ultrasound; Echocardiography; Lower limb compressive venous ultrasonography"