English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We recently identified four patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) who presented with progressive, but nonspecific, respiratory symptoms and were initially diagnosed with an exacerbation of established or presumed airflow obstruction.  No specific explanation for the apparent respiratory exacerbation was found and each patient failed to respond to bronchodilator and/or antibiotic therapy, thereby triggering an evaluation for PE. Pulmonary embolism occurs with disturbing frequency in the setting of an apparent chronic airflow obstruction exacerbation without a clear explanation.  Suspicion of PE by the clinician is essential as patient symptoms and routine laboratory evaluation do not always differentiate PE from exacerbation of airflow obstruction. D-dimer determination is a reasonable first diagnostic step with subsequent testing directed by the D-dimer result in the context of an individualized assessment of PE risk.  The diagnosis of PE in this setting is critically important for avoiding the attendant morbidity and mortality associated with untreated PE.

Diagnosing Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with Suspected or Established Chronic Lung Disease