Literature DB >> 10498557

Clinical utility of a rapid whole-blood D-dimer assay in patients with cancer who present with suspected acute deep venous thrombosis.

A Y Lee1, J A Julian, M N Levine, J I Weitz, C Kearon, P S Wells, J S Ginsberg.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although D-dimer assays have high negative predictive values for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis, their accuracy in patients with cancer is uncertain.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical utility of a whole-blood D-dimer assay for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis in patients with and those without cancer.
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of three prospective studies.
SETTING: Two tertiary care hospitals. PATIENTS: 1068 consecutive outpatients with suspected deep venous thrombosis. MEASUREMENTS: All patients underwent D-dimer testing and assessment with a priori diagnostic strategies that incorporated impedance plethysmography, compression ultrasonography, or contrast venography. Patients in whom deep venous thrombosis was not diagnosed initially were followed for 3 months for the development of thrombosis. Results of D-dimer testing were assessed according to the final diagnosis based on objective testing and clinical follow-up. Cancer status was identified at presentation.
RESULTS: The prevalence of deep venous thrombosis was 48.8% in 121 patients with cancer and 14.6% in 947 patients without cancer. Although the sensitivity of the D-dimer assay was similar in patients with and those without cancer (86.4% [95% CI, 75.0% to 94.0%] and 82.6% [CI, 75.2% to 88.5%], respectively), the specificity was significantly lower in patients with cancer (48.4% [CI, 35.5% to 61.4%] and 82.2% [CI, 79.4% to 84.8%]), as was the negative predictive value (78.9% [CI, 62.7% to 90.4%] and 96.5% [CI, 94.9% to 97.8%]). In contrast, the likelihood ratios of a negative test result (0.28 [CI, 0.14 to 0.56] and 0.21 [CI, 0.15 to 0.31]) did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSIONS: A negative D-dimer test result in patients with cancer does not reliably exclude deep venous thrombosis because the negative predictive value of the test is significantly lower in these patients than in patients without cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10498557     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-131-6-199909210-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  12 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

2.  Normal D-dimer levels in cancer patients with radiologic evidence of pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Aiham Qdaisat; Carol C Wu; Sai-Ching Jim Yeung
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 2.300

3.  Update from the clinic: what's new in the diagnosis of cancer-associated thrombosis?

Authors:  Erica A Peterson; Agnes Y Y Lee
Journal:  Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program       Date:  2019-12-06

Review 4.  D-dimer testing: the role of the clinical laboratory in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  B H Mavromatis; C M Kessler
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 5.  [Importance of biomarkers in pulmonary embolism].

Authors:  S Kupp; J Pöss
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 0.743

6.  Usefulness of Clinical Prediction Rules, D-dimer, and Arterial Blood Gas Analysis to Predict Pulmonary Embolism in Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Asifa Karamat; Shazia Awan; Muhammad Ghazanfar Hussain; Fahad Al Hameed; Faheem Butt; Ali Saeed Wahla
Journal:  Oman Med J       Date:  2017-03

Review 7.  Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Clive Kearon
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-01-21       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 8.  Combined use of rapid D-dimer testing and estimation of clinical probability in the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis: systematic review.

Authors:  Tonya L Fancher; Richard H White; Richard L Kravitz
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-09-21

9.  Comparison of Enoxaparin and Warfarin for Secondary Prevention of Cancer-Associated Stroke.

Authors:  Hyemin Jang; Jung Jae Lee; Mi Ji Lee; Sookyung Ryoo; Chang Hyo Yoon; Gyeong-Moon Kim; Chin-Sang Chung; Kwang Ho Lee; Oh Young Bang; Suk Jae Kim
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 4.375

Review 10.  Effectiveness of d-dimer as a screening test for venous thromboembolism: an update.

Authors:  Swaroopa Pulivarthi; Murali Krishna Gurram
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci       Date:  2014-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.