ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In patients clinically suspected of pulmonary embolism (PE), physicians often rely on an intuitive estimation ('gestalt') of PE presence. Although shown to be predictive, gestalt is criticized for its assumed variation across physicians and lack of standardization.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of gestalt in diagnosing PE and gain insight into its possible variation.

METHODS: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis including patients suspected of PE. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of gestalt for diagnosing PE, quantified as a risk ratio (RR) between gestalt and PE from a two-stage random-effect log-binomial meta-analysis regression as well as gestalts' sensitivity and specificity. Variability of these measures was explored across different healthcare settings, publication period, PE prevalence, patient subgroups (sex, heart failure, chronic lung disease, and items of the Wells score other than gestalt), and age.

RESULTS: We analysed 20,770 patients suspected of PE from 16 original studies. The prevalence of PE in patients with and without a positive gestalt was 28.8% versus 9.1%, respectively. The overall RR was 3.02 (95%CI 2.35, 3.87) and overall sensitivity and specificity were 74% (95%CI 68-79%) and 61% (95%CI 53-68%). Although variation was observed across individual studies (I2-90.63%), diagnostic accuracy was consistent across all subgroups and healthcare settings.

CONCLUSIONS: A positive gestalt was associated with a threefold increased risk of PE in suspected patients. Although variation was observed across studies, the RR of gestalt was similar across prespecified subgroups and healthcare settings, exemplifying its diagnostic value for all patients suspected of PE.

PMID:37263381 | DOI:10.1016/j.jtha.2023.05.023

18:54