scholarly journals Accuracy of PE rule-out strategies in pregnancy: secondary analysis of the DiPEP study prospective cohort

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
pp. 423-428
Author(s):  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Catherine Nelson-Piercy ◽  
Beverley J Hunt ◽  
Gordon Fuller
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Postpartum Women ◽  
Clinical Probability ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
In Pregnancy ◽  
Rule Out

ObjectiveRecent studies suggest that combinations of clinical probability assessment (the YEARS algorithm or Geneva score) and D-dimer can safely rule out suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) in pregnant women. We performed a secondary analysis of the DiPEP (Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism in Pregnancy) study data to determine the diagnostic accuracy of these strategies.MethodsThe DiPEP study prospectively recruited and collected data and blood samples from pregnant/postpartum women with suspected PE across 11 hospitals and retrospectively collected data from pregnant/postpartum women with diagnosed PE across all UK hospitals (15 February 2015 to 31 August 2016). We selected prospectively recruited pregnant women who had definitive diagnostic imaging for this analysis. We used clinical data and D-dimer results to determine whether the rule out strategies would recommend further investigation. Two independent adjudicators used data from imaging reports, treatments and adverse events up to 30 days to determine the reference standard.ResultsPEs were diagnosed in 12/219 (5.5%) women. The YEARS/D-dimer strategy would have ruled out PE in 96/219 (43.8%) but this would have included 5 of the 12 with PEs. Sensitivity for PE was 58.3% (95% CI 28.6% to 83.5%) and specificity 44.0% (37.1% to 51.0%). The Geneva/D-dimer strategy would have ruled out PE in 46/219 (21.0%) but this would have included three of the 12 with PE. Sensitivity was 75.0% (95% CI 42.8% to 93.3%) and specificity 20.8% (95% CI 15.6% to 27.1%). Administration of anticoagulants prior to blood sampling may have reduced D-dimer sensitivity for small PE.ConclusionStrategies using clinical probability and D-dimer have limited diagnostic accuracy and do not accurately rule out all PE in pregnancy. It is uncertain whether PE missed by these strategies lead to clinically important consequences.

Comparison of clinical probability-adjusted D-dimer and age-adjusted D-dimer interpretation to exclude venous thromboembolism

2017 ◽  
Vol 117 (10) ◽  
pp. 1937-1943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Julian ◽  
Lori-Ann Linkins ◽  
Shannon Bates ◽  
Clive Kearon ◽  
Sarah Takach Lapner
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Blood Samples ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Clinical Probability ◽  
Deep Vein ◽  
New Strategies ◽  
D Dimer

SummaryTwo new strategies for interpreting D-dimer results have been proposed: i) using a progressively higher D-dimer threshold with increasing age (age-adjusted strategy) and ii) using a D-dimer threshold in patients with low clinical probability that is twice the threshold used in patients with moderate clinical probability (clinical probability-adjusted strategy). Our objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of age-adjusted and clinical probability-adjusted D-dimer interpretation in patients with a low or moderate clinical probability of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We performed a retrospective analysis of clinical data and blood samples from two prospective studies. We compared the negative predictive value (NPV) for VTE, and the proportion of patients with a negative D-dimer result, using two D-dimer interpretation strategies: the age-adjusted strategy, which uses a progressively higher D-dimer threshold with increasing age over 50 years (age in years × 10 µg/L FEU); and the clinical probability-adjusted strategy which uses a D-dimer threshold of 1000 µg/L FEU in patients with low clinical probability and 500 µg/L FEU in patients with moderate clinical probability. A total of 1649 outpatients with low or moderate clinical probability for a first suspected deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism were included. The NPV of both the clinical probability-adjusted strategy (99.7%) and the age-adjusted strategy (99.6%) were similar. However, the proportion of patients with a negative result was greater with the clinical probability-adjusted strategy (56.1% vs, 50.9%; difference 5.2%; 95% CI 3.5% to 6.8%). These findings suggest that clinical probability-adjusted D-dimer interpretation is a better way of interpreting D-dimer results compared to age-adjusted interpretation.

From dyspnea to pulmonary embolism

2009 ◽  
Vol 66 (9) ◽  
pp. 643-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnaud Perrier
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Prediction Rule ◽  
Clinical Suspicion ◽  
First Episode ◽  
Left Heart Failure ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Clinical Probability ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is often evoked in patients with new-onset or worsening dyspnea, especially when it is associated with pleuritic chest pain. However, the prevalence of PE in patients with a clinical suspicion ranges from 20 % to as low as 5 %. Unfortunately, what exactly constitutes a clinical suspicion of PE in a patient with dyspnea can not be accurately standardized. The presence of risk factors for venous thromboembolism should prompt the search for PE. However, their absence does not rule out PE as the cause of the patient’s symptoms, since around 30 % of patients with a first episode of PE have no risk or precipitating factors. Once PE is suspected, the diagnostic workup can be standardized and based on a large body of evidence, combining clinical assessment by a prediction rule, D-dimer measurement and CT angiography in patients with an elevated D-dimer level or a high clinical probability of PE. Patients with obvious alternative diagnoses such as acute left heart failure, pneumonia or acute coronary syndrome should not be investigated for PE.

Age-Adjusted D-Dimer Cut-off Levels to Rule out Pulmonary Embolism: A Prospective Outcome Study

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. LBA-4-LBA-4
Author(s):  
Marc Righini ◽  
Paul den Exter ◽  
Josien van ES ◽  
Franck Verschuren ◽  
Alexandre Ghuisen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Emergency Room ◽  
Pulmonary Angiography ◽  
Outcome Study ◽  
Clinical Probability ◽  
Imaging Test ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out

Abstract Introduction D-dimer testing allows to safely rule out pulmonary embolism (PE) without imaging test in approximately one third of outpatients. However, D-Dimer test is less useful as age increases because of a lower specificity. We recently derived an age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value (age-adjusted cut-off = patient’s age x 10 in patients aged > 50 years, in μg/L), which allowed to significantly increase the proportion of patients in whom PE could be non-invasively excluded, without compromising safety. However, before being implemented in clinical practice, the safety of the age-adjusted cut-off should be verified in a management outcome study. Methods We designed a multicentre multinational prospective management outcome study. All consecutive outpatients seen in the emergency room of 22 centres in 4 countries with clinically suspected PE were assessed by a sequential diagnostic strategy based on the assessment of clinical probability, D-dimer measurement and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Patients with a D-dimer value between the usual threshold of 500 μg/L and their age-adjusted cut-off did not undergo CTPA and were left untreated and formally followed for a three-month period. Results Between January 1, 2010 and February 28, 2013, we included 3,377 patients. Mean age was 62 years, and 57% were females. Overall, the proportion of confirmed PE was 18%.  Among the 2,927 patients with a non-high clinical probability, 832 (28.4%) had a D-Dimer < 500 μg/L, and 345 additional patients (11.8%) had a D-Dimer comprised between 500 μg/L and their age-adjusted cut-off. During the 3-month follow-up period, out of the 345 patients with a D-Dimer between 500 μg/L and their age-adjusted cut-off, 18 patients received anticoagulation for another indication than PE. Of the remaining 327 patients, 7 died, and 7 underwent testing for suspected venous thromboembolism (VTE), of which one was confirmed. Therefore, the failure rate of the age-adjusted cut-off was 1/327: 0.3%, (95% CI 0.1 to 1.7%). Overall, 789 patients were aged 75 years or more, of them 697 had a non-high clinical probability. The proportion of patients with D-Dimer < 500 μg/L was 50/697 (7.2%). Another 161 patients had a D-Dimer above 500 μg/L and under their age-adjusted cut-off. Therefore, the proportion of patients > 75 with a negative D-Dimer using the age-adjusted cut-off was 211/697 (30.3%), of them none had a confirmed VTE during follow-up: 0.0%, (95%CI: 0.0 to 1.9%). Conclusions Our study demonstrates that the age-adjusted D-Dimer cut-off may now be used in clinical practice in emergency room patients with suspected PE. Combined with clinical probability, it increases the number of patients in whom PE can be excluded without imaging test, and this is particularly true among elderly patients, with a four-fold increased yield of D-dimer. A D-Dimer above 500 μg/L but under the age-adjusted cut-off safely excludes the diagnosis of PE, with a 3-month risk of VTE in line with that observed in patients with a D-Dimer under 500 μg/L or after a negative pulmonary angiography, the gold-standard test for PE. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

D-Dimer and CT Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism

2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
DAMIAN MCNAMARA
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out

D-Dimer Determination to Exclude Pulmonary Embolism: a Two-Step Approach Using Latex Assay as a Screening Tool

1994 ◽  
Vol 72 (01) ◽  
pp. 089-091 ◽  
Author(s):  
P de Moerloose ◽  
Ph Minazio ◽  
G Reber ◽  
A Perrier ◽  
H Bounameaux
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Elisa Assay ◽  
Elisa Technique ◽  
Diagnostic Step ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out ◽  
Latex Test

SummaryD-dimer (DD), when measured by a quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), is a valuable test to exclude venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, DD ELISA technique is not appropriate for emergency use and the available agglutination latex assays are not sensitive enough to be used as an alternative to rule out the diagnosis of VTE. Latex assays could still be used as screening tests. We tested this hypothesis by comparing DD levels measured by ELISA and latex assays in 334 patients suspected of pulmonary embolism. All but one patient with a positive (DD ≥500 ng/ml) latex assay had DD levels higher than 500 ng/ml with the ELISA assay. Accordingly, ELISA technique could be restricted to patients with a negative result in latex assay. This two-step approach would have spared about 50% of ELISA in our cohort. In conclusion, our data indicate that a latex test can be used as a first diagnostic step to rule out pulmonary embolism provided a negative result is confirmed by ELISA and the performance of the latex assay used has been assessed properly.

Evidence for Age-Adjusted D-Dimer to Rule out Pulmonary Embolism: An Institutional Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 154 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S5-S5
Author(s):  
Ridin Balakrishnan ◽  
Daniel Casa ◽  
Morayma Reyes Gil
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
False Positive ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
Moderate Risk ◽  
Older Population ◽  
Statistical Measures ◽  
Positive Rate ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out

Abstract The diagnostic approach for ruling out suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE) in the ED setting includes several tests: ultrasound, plasma d-dimer assays, ventilation-perfusion scans and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Importantly, a pretest probability scoring algorithm is highly recommended to triage high risk cases while also preventing unnecessary testing and harm to low/moderate risk patients. The d-dimer assay (both ELISA and immunoturbidometric) has been shown to be extremely sensitive to rule out PE in conjunction with clinical probability. In particularly, d-dimer testing is recommended for low/moderate risk patients, in whom a negative d-dimer essentially rules out PE sparing these patients from CTPA radiation exposure, longer hospital stay and anticoagulation. However, an unspecific increase in fibrin-degradation related products has been seen with increase in age, resulting in higher false positive rate in the older population. This study analyzed patient visits to the ED of a large academic institution for five years and looked at the relationship between d-dimer values, age and CTPA results to better understand the value of age-adjusted d-dimer cut-offs in ruling out PE in the older population. A total of 7660 ED visits had a CTPA done to rule out PE; out of which 1875 cases had a d-dimer done in conjunction with the CT and 5875 had only CTPA done. Out of the 1875 cases, 1591 had positive d-dimer results (&gt;0.50 µg/ml (FEU)), of which 910 (57%) were from patients older than or equal to fifty years of age. In these older patients, 779 (86%) had a negative CT result. The following were the statistical measures of the d-dimer test before adjusting for age: sensitivity (98%), specificity (12%); negative predictive value (98%) and false positive rate (88%). After adjusting for age in people older than 50 years (d-dimer cut off = age/100), 138 patients eventually turned out to be d-dimer negative and every case but four had a CT result that was also negative for a PE. The four cases included two non-diagnostic results and two with subacute/chronic/subsegmental PE on imaging. None of these four patients were prescribed anticoagulation. The statistical measures of the d-dimer test after adjusting for age showed: sensitivity (96%), specificity (20%); negative predictive value (98%) and a decrease in the false positive rate (80%). Therefore, imaging could have been potentially avoided in 138/779 (18%) of the patients who were part of this older population and had eventual negative or not clinically significant findings on CTPA if age-adjusted d-dimers were used. This data very strongly advocates for the clinical usefulness of an age-adjusted cut-off of d-dimer to rule out PE.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document