Is stand-alone D-dimer testing safe to rule out acute pulmonary embolism? - PubMed (original) (raw)
. 2017 Feb;15(2):323-328.
doi: 10.1111/jth.13574. Epub 2016 Dec 24.
Affiliations
- PMID: 27873439
- DOI: 10.1111/jth.13574
Free article
Is stand-alone D-dimer testing safe to rule out acute pulmonary embolism?
N van Es et al. J Thromb Haemost. 2017 Feb.
Free article
Abstract
Essentials A stand-alone D-dimer below 750 μg/L has been proposed to rule out acute pulmonary embolism (PE). This was a post-hoc analysis on data from 6 studies comprising 7268 patients with suspected PE. The negative predictive value of a D-dimer <750 μg/L ranged from 79% to 96% in various subgroups. Stand-alone D-dimer testing seems to be unsafe to rule out PE in all patients.
Summary: Background Recently, stand-alone D-dimer testing at a positivity threshold of 750 μg L-1 has been proposed as a safe and efficient approach to rule out acute pulmonary embolism (PE), without additional imaging, but this approach needs validation. Objectives To evaluate stand-alone D-dimer testing at a positivity threshold of 750 μg L-1 to rule out PE. Methods Individual data from 7268 patients with suspected PE previously enrolled in six prospective management studies were used. Patients were assessed by the Wells rule followed by quantitative D-dimer testing in those with a 'PE unlikely' score. Patients were classified post hoc as having a negative (< 750 μg L-1 ) or positive (≥ 750 μg L-1 ) D-dimer. Using a one-stage meta-analytic approach, the negative predictive value (NPV) of stand-alone D-dimer testing was evaluated overall and in different risk subgroups. Results The pooled incidence of PE was 23% (range, 13-42%). Overall, 44% of patients had a D-dimer < 750 μg L-1 , of whom 2.8% were diagnosed with PE at baseline or during 3-month follow-up (NPV, 97.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 94.9-98.5). The NPV was highest in patients with a low probability of PE according to the Wells rule (99.2%; 95% CI, 98.6-99.5%) and lowest in those with a high probability of PE (79.3%; 95% CI, 53.0-92.8%). The NPVs in patients with active cancer, patients with previous venous thromboembolism and inpatients were 96.2% (95% CI, 85.6-99.1%), 94.7% (95% CI, 88.6-97.6%) and 92.7% (95% CI, 79.3-97.7%), respectively. Conclusions Our findings suggest that stand-alone D-dimer testing at a positivity threshold of 750 μg L-1 is not safe to rule out acute PE.
Keywords: D-dimer; diagnosis; pulmonary embolism; sensitivity and specificity; venous thromboembolism.
© 2016 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.
Similar articles
- The original and simplified Wells rules and age-adjusted D-dimer testing to rule out pulmonary embolism: an individual patient data meta-analysis.
van Es N, Kraaijpoel N, Klok FA, Huisman MV, Den Exter PL, Mos IC, Galipienzo J, Büller HR, Bossuyt PM. van Es N, et al. J Thromb Haemost. 2017 Apr;15(4):678-684. doi: 10.1111/jth.13630. Epub 2017 Feb 16. J Thromb Haemost. 2017. PMID: 28106338 - Rapid quantitative D-dimer to exclude pulmonary embolism: a prospective cohort management study.
Bates SM, Takach Lapner S, Douketis JD, Kearon C, Julian J, Parpia S, Schulman S, Weitz JI, Linkins LA, Crowther M, Lim W, Spencer FA, Lee AY, Gross PL, Ginsberg J. Bates SM, et al. J Thromb Haemost. 2016 Mar;14(3):504-9. doi: 10.1111/jth.13234. Epub 2016 Feb 5. J Thromb Haemost. 2016. PMID: 26707364 - Qualitative point-of-care D-dimer testing compared with quantitative D-dimer testing in excluding pulmonary embolism in primary care.
Lucassen WA, Erkens PM, Geersing GJ, Büller HR, Moons KG, Stoffers HE, van Weert HC. Lucassen WA, et al. J Thromb Haemost. 2015 Jun;13(6):1004-9. doi: 10.1111/jth.12951. Epub 2015 May 9. J Thromb Haemost. 2015. PMID: 25845618 - Wells Rule and d-Dimer Testing to Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Individual-Patient Data Meta-analysis.
van Es N, van der Hulle T, van Es J, den Exter PL, Douma RA, Goekoop RJ, Mos IC, Galipienzo J, Kamphuisen PW, Huisman MV, Klok FA, Büller HR, Bossuyt PM. van Es N, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2016 Aug 16;165(4):253-61. doi: 10.7326/M16-0031. Epub 2016 May 17. Ann Intern Med. 2016. PMID: 27182696 Review. - Different accuracies of rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent, turbidimetric, and agglutination D-dimer assays for thrombosis exclusion: impact on diagnostic work-ups of outpatients with suspected deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.
Michiels JJ, Gadisseur A, van der Planken M, Schroyens W, De Maeseneer M, Hermsen JT, Trienekens PH, Hoogsteden H, Pattynama PM. Michiels JJ, et al. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2006 Oct;32(7):678-93. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-951296. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2006. PMID: 17024595 Review.
Cited by
- State-of-the-Art Imaging for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism.
Roshkovan L, Litt H. Roshkovan L, et al. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2018 Aug 7;20(9):71. doi: 10.1007/s11936-018-0671-6. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2018. PMID: 30084035 Review. - Deep Vein Thrombosis of the Upper Extremity.
Heil J, Miesbach W, Vogl T, Bechstein WO, Reinisch A. Heil J, et al. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2017 Apr 7;114(14):244-249. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2017.0244. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2017. PMID: 28446351 Free PMC article. - Diagnostic Value of D-Dimer and INR in Patients Suspected to Have Prosthetic Valve Dysfunction.
Moghadam RH, Salehi N, Rouzbahani M, Janjani P, Mahmoudi S, Izadpanah M, Heydarpour F, Shakiba E. Moghadam RH, et al. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2022 Oct 8;37(5):674-679. doi: 10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0230. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2022. PMID: 35244382 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical