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 (>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.
The impact of COVID‐19 on the sensitivity of D‐dimer for pulmonary embolism