OBJECTIVES: Available D-dimer assays have low specificity and may increase radiographic testing for pulmonary embolism (PE). To help clinicians better target testing, this study sought to quantify the effect of risk factors for a positive quantitative D-dimer in patients evaluated for PE. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Emergency department (ED) patients evaluated for PE with a quantitative D-dimer were eligible for inclusion. The main outcome of interest was a positive D-dimer. Odds ratio (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined by multivariable logistic regression. Adjusted estimates of relative risk were also calculated. RESULTS: A total of 4,346 patients had D-dimer testing, of whom 2,930 (67%) were women. A total of 2,500 (57%) were white, 1,474 (34%) were black or African American, 238 (6%) were Hispanic, and 144 (3%) were of other race or ethnicity. The mean (+/-SD) age was 48 (+/-17) years. Overall, 1,903 (44%) D-dimers were positive. Model fit was adequate (c-statistic = 0.739, Hosmer and Lemeshow p-value = 0.13). Significant positive predictors of D-dimer positive included female sex; increasing age; black (vs. white) race; cocaine use; general, limb, or neurologic immobility; hemoptysis; hemodialysis; active malignancy; rheumatoid arthritis; lupus; sickle cell disease; prior venous thromboembolism (VTE; not under treatment); pregnancy and postpartum state; and abdominal, chest, orthopedic, or other surgery. Warfarin use was protective. In contrast, several variables known to be associated with PE were not associated with positive D-dimer results: body mass index (BMI), estrogen use, family history of PE, (inactive) malignancy, thrombophilia, trauma within 4 weeks, travel, and prior VTE (under treatment). CONCLUSIONS: Many factors are associated with a positive D-dimer test. The effect of these factors on the usefulness of the test should be considered prior to ordering a D-dimer. (c) 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.
OBJECTIVES: Available D-dimer assays have low specificity and may increase radiographic testing for pulmonary embolism (PE). To help clinicians better target testing, this study sought to quantify the effect of risk factors for a positive quantitative D-dimer in patients evaluated for PE. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Emergency department (ED) patients evaluated for PE with a quantitative D-dimer were eligible for inclusion. The main outcome of interest was a positive D-dimer. Odds ratio (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined by multivariable logistic regression. Adjusted estimates of relative risk were also calculated. RESULTS: A total of 4,346 patients had D-dimer testing, of whom 2,930 (67%) were women. A total of 2,500 (57%) were white, 1,474 (34%) were black or African American, 238 (6%) were Hispanic, and 144 (3%) were of other race or ethnicity. The mean (+/-SD) age was 48 (+/-17) years. Overall, 1,903 (44%) D-dimers were positive. Model fit was adequate (c-statistic = 0.739, Hosmer and Lemeshow p-value = 0.13). Significant positive predictors of D-dimer positive included female sex; increasing age; black (vs. white) race; cocaine use; general, limb, or neurologic immobility; hemoptysis; hemodialysis; active malignancy; rheumatoid arthritis; lupus; sickle cell disease; prior venous thromboembolism (VTE; not under treatment); pregnancy and postpartum state; and abdominal, chest, orthopedic, or other surgery. Warfarin use was protective. In contrast, several variables known to be associated with PE were not associated with positive D-dimer results: body mass index (BMI), estrogen use, family history of PE, (inactive) malignancy, thrombophilia, trauma within 4 weeks, travel, and prior VTE (under treatment). CONCLUSIONS: Many factors are associated with a positive D-dimer test. The effect of these factors on the usefulness of the test should be considered prior to ordering a D-dimer. (c) 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.
Authors: Peter B Richman; Shari Dominguez; David Kasper; Frederick Chen; Jeremy Friese; Joseph Wood; Joseph Collins; Jeffrey A Kline Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2006-02-22 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: M Epiney; F Boehlen; M Boulvain; G Reber; E Antonelli; M Morales; O Irion; P De Moerloose Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: Jean-Noel Fiessinger; Menno V Huisman; Bruce L Davidson; Henri Bounameaux; Charles W Francis; Henry Eriksson; Torbjörn Lundström; Scott D Berkowitz; Per Nyström; Mona Thorsén; Jeffrey S Ginsberg Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-02-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Christopher Kabrhel; Raphaëlle Varraso; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Eric B Rimm; Carlos A Camargo Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2009-04-16 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Daren M Beam; D Mark Courtney; Christopher Kabrhel; Christopher L Moore; Peter B Richman; Jeffrey A Kline Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2009-01-08 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Arjun K Venkatesh; Jeffrey A Kline; D Mark Courtney; Carlos A Camargo; Michael C Plewa; Kristen E Nordenholz; Christopher L Moore; Peter B Richman; Howard A Smithline; Daren M Beam; Christopher Kabrhel Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2012-07-09
Authors: Matthew J Feinstein; Milana Bogorodskaya; Gerald S Bloomfield; Rajesh Vedanthan; Mark J Siedner; Gene F Kwan; Christopher T Longenecker Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 2.931