UC Davis

Background

The Pulmonary Embolism Rule Out Criteria (PERC) Peds rule, derived from the PERC rule, was derived to estimate a low pretest probability for pulmonary embolism (PE) in children but has not been prospectively validated.

Objective

The objective of this study was to present a protocol for an ongoing multicenter prospective observational study that evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of the PERC-Peds rule.

Methods

This protocol is identified by the acronym, BEdside Exclusion of Pulmonary Embolism without Radiation in children. The study aims were designed to prospectively validate, or if necessary, refine, the accuracy of PERC-Peds and D-dimer in excluding PE among children with clinical suspicion or testing for PE. Multiple ancillary studies will examine clinical characteristics and epidemiology of the participants. Children aged 4 through 17 years were being enrolled at 21 sites through the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN). Patients taking anticoagulant therapy are excluded. PERC-Peds criteria data, clinical gestalt, and demographic information are collected in real time. The criterion standard outcome is image-confirmed venous thromboembolism within 45 days, determined from independent expert adjudication. We assessed interrater reliability of the PERC-Peds, frequency of PERC-Peds use in routine clinical care, and descriptive characteristics of missed eligible and missed patients with PE.

Results

Enrollment is currently 60% complete with an anticipated data lock in 2025.

Conclusions

This prospective multicenter observational study will not only test whether a set of simple criteria can safely exclude PE without need for imaging but also provide a resource to fill a critical knowledge gap about clinical characteristics of children with suspected and diagnosed PE.