Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 16, 2026

A Porcine Model of Acute Autologous Pulmonary Embolism
Published on: September 6, 2024
Are the Wells Score and the Revised Geneva Score valuable for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in pregnancy?
Omar Touhami1, Sofiene Ben Marzouk2, Laidi Bennasr2
1"C" Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tunis Maternity and Neonatology Center, Tunis El Manar University, Tunisia.
Objectives:
To evaluate and to compare the predictive accuracy of the Wells score and the revised Geneva scores for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the pregnant and postpartum population.
Study Design:
All pregnant or post-partum patients with a suspected PE and for whom a diagnostic imaging testing was performed (VQ scintigraphy or computed tomography pulmonary angiography) over a 3-year period were included in the study. The Wells and Revised Geneva Scores were calculated on the same cohort of patients and dichotomized into low and intermediate/high probability groups. The sensitivities and specificities were calculated. Overall accuracy was determined using receiver operator characteristic curve analysis.
Results:
A total of 103 patients were included. The overall prevalence of PE was 26.2% (27/103). Using the Wells Score, the prevalence of patients with PE in the low, intermediate and high probability categories was 20.5%, 43.5% and 50% respectively. Using the Revised Geneva Score, the prevalence of patients with PE in the low, intermediate and high probability categories was 17%, 36.2 and 33.3% respectively. In low risk groups of the Wells score and the simplified revised Geneva score the prevalence of PE was not statistically significantly different: respectively: 20.5% and 17.5% (p = 0,232). The agreement on clinical assessment using the Wells score and using the revised Geneva score was weak (κ coefficient = 0.154). In total, 26 (25.2%) patients were classified differently using the 2 scores. There was no significant difference in the overall accuracies of the Wells (0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.79) and Revised Geneva Scores (0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.76) as determined by the area under the ROC curves (P = 0.628). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of the Wells score and the revised Geneva score were respectively: 40.7%, 81.5%, 44%, 79.4% and 62.9%, 59.2%, 35.4%, 81.8%.
Conclusion(S):
The Wells score and the revised Geneva seems not to be valuable in the pregnant and post partum population. A specific risk score of PE for pregnant and postpartum population is needed to reduce the rate of unnecessary imaging studies, especially in this specific population were the use of radiation and contrast agent is problematic.
Related Concept Videos
Introduction to z Scores
z scores...
Introduction to z Scores
z scores...
z Scores and Area Under the Curve
z Scores and Unusual Values
This score indicates how far a value is from the mean in terms of standard deviation. For example, if a data value has a z score of +1, the researcher can infer that the particular data value is one standard deviation above the mean. If another data...
Pulmonary Embolism I: Introduction
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT

