Literature DB >> 10421279

Normal D-dimer levels in patients with pulmonary embolism.

I Kutinsky1, S Blakley, V Roche.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is frequently evaluated in acute care settings. Despite this, the clinical diagnosis of PE is difficult. Results of ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scans may be inconclusive, and pulmonary angiograms (PAGs) are cumbersome, involve risk, and are often unavailable. Using PAG as the standard criterion, we evaluated the relationship between PE, V/Q scans, and semiquantitative latex agglutination (LA) D-dimer levels.
METHODS: Ninety-eight patients who underwent V/Q scanning for suspected PE were enrolled; based on the results of the scans, the patients were scheduled for PAG. Blood samples were drawn for LA D-dimer assays during the PAGs at Saint Joseph Hospital, Denver, Colo, from January 1, 1996, to February 1, 1997. A detailed medical record review was performed for all enrollees.
RESULTS: The mean+/-SEM patient age was 56.6+/-1.9 years; 52 (53%) were men, 13 (13%) had cancer, 23 (23%) had undergone surgery within 30 days of their PAG, and 13 (13%) were receiving warfarin sodium. There were no differences in warfarin therapy, hypercoaguable state, or cancer prevalence between patients with negative and positive PAGs (P = .53). Ventilation-perfusion scan results were available for all study patients. Eight (27%) of 30 patients who had positive angiogram results had LA D-dimer levels less than 250 ng/mL. Patients with positive PAGs (n = 30) had the following V/Q scan results: normal, 0; low probability, 7; intermediate or indeterminate probability, 22; and high probability, 1. In patients with low-probability V/Q scan results (n = 34), a positive D-dimer result for PE (>250 ng/mL) had a sensitivity of 71.4% (95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.97) and a negative predictive value of 87.5% (95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.98). We found a significant difference in D-dimer levels in patients with an abnormal angiogram result (mean, 750 ng/mL) compared with patients with a normal angiogram result (mean, 250 ng/mL) (P= .01, chi2 test).
CONCLUSIONS: Eight patients had normal D-dimer levels with angiographic evidence of PE. Algorithms in acute care settings have been proposed; they exclude PE with normal D-dimer levels using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay technique. These cannot be extrapolated to the more widely used LA assays. A normal LA D-dimer level alone or with V/Q scan results is not recommended to preclude the treatment of PE.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10421279     DOI: 10.1001/archinte.159.14.1569

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-9926


  6 in total

Review 1.  Role of fibrin D-dimer testing in emergency medicine.

Authors:  A Wakai; A Gleeson; D Winter
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 2.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of strategies for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Pierre-Marie Roy; Isabelle Colombet; Pierre Durieux; Gilles Chatellier; Hervé Sors; Guy Meyer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-07-30

3.  Over-reliance of D-dimer in isolation to exclude venous thrombosis should be avoided.

Authors:  Jecko Thachil
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  D-dimer value in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism-may it exclude only?

Authors:  Magdalena Sikora-Skrabaka; Damian Skrabaka; Paolo Ruggeri; Gaetano Caramori; Szymon Skoczyński; Adam Barczyk
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.895

5.  The diagnostic value of D-dimer with simplified Geneva score (SGS) pre-test in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE).

Authors:  Zhihui Fu; Xibin Zhuang; Yueming He; Hong Huang; Weifeng Guo
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 1.637

6.  D-dimer specificity and clinical context: an old unlearned story.

Authors:  Matteo Marin; Daniele Orso; Nicola Federici; Luigi Vetrugno; Tiziana Bove
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 9.097

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.