Considerable progress has been made in pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis du
ring the last 10 years. New, noninvasive tools such as D-dimer measurement
and lower limb venous compression ultrasonography have been introduced as d
iagnostic strategies. Clinical evaluation of the likelihood of PE has been
rehabilitated and has proven to be accurate and useful. The interpretation
of lung scan results has become more standardized and clear to clinicians.
Finally, two diagnostic strategies have been validated in large scale outco
me studies. Both rely on a sequential combination of the aforementioned ins
truments and have safely treated more than 90% of patients without use of p
ulmonary angiography. The S-month venous thromboembolic risk in patients in
whom PE was ruled out and, hence, who did not undergo anticoagulation was
less than 1% in both studies. In the absence of a formal comparison of thei
r respective cost-effectiveness, choosing between these strategies rests on
local preferences or logistics. Finally, spiral computed tomography (CT) s
eems promising and might modify the diagnostic work-up of PE in the near fu
ture. However, it is insufficiently validated, and its place in a rational
diagnostic algorithm is not defined.