Praxis Medical Insights

Est. 2024 • Clinical Guidelines Distilled

Made possible by volunteer editors from the University of Calgary & University of Alberta

Last Updated: 9/4/2025

Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism in Low-Risk Patients

Assessment of Pretest Probability

  • The American College of Physicians recommends determining the pretest probability of pulmonary embolism using validated clinical prediction rules or clinician gestalt, as seen in this 28-year-old female patient with only one PERC criterion and no other concerning features 1, 2
  • The patient's symptoms improved with Flonase, suggesting allergic rhinitis as the likely cause of her shortness of breath, which is consistent with a low pretest probability for pulmonary embolism 3
  • Based on these factors, patients with low pretest probability, such as this patient, would be classified as having a low risk for pulmonary embolism 1, 3

Application of PERC Criteria

  • The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-Out Criteria (PERC) include age >49, pulse >99, O2 saturation <95%, hemoptysis, exogenous estrogen, prior VTE, recent surgery/trauma, and unilateral leg swelling, which can help identify low-risk patients in whom the risk of testing outweighs the risk of pulmonary embolism 4, 5
  • A meta-analysis of 12 studies found that the overall proportion of missed pulmonary embolisms using PERC was only 0.3% (44 of 14,844 cases), indicating the effectiveness of PERC in ruling out pulmonary embolism in low-risk patients 5

D-dimer Testing Considerations

  • For patients with low pretest probability who do not meet all PERC criteria, the next step would typically be D-dimer testing, but this test has low specificity and can lead to unnecessary imaging if positive 6
  • The American College of Physicians guidelines emphasize avoiding unnecessary testing in low-risk patients, such as this 28-year-old female patient with a clear alternative diagnosis and only one PERC criterion 2

Risk-Benefit Analysis

  • Unnecessary D-dimer testing can lead to false-positive results and subsequent CT imaging, which exposes the patient to radiation and contrast risks 3, 6
  • The risk of missing pulmonary embolism in low-risk patients, such as this patient, is extremely low given their age, single risk factor, and symptom improvement with appropriate treatment for allergic rhinitis 3, 5