Fridtjof B Rinde1, Synne G Fronas2, Waleed Ghanima2, Anders Vik3, John-Bjarne Hansen4, Sigrid K Brækkan4. 1. K.G. Jebsen - Thrombosis Research and Expertise Center (TREC), Department of Clinical Medicine, UiT - The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway. Electronic address: fridtjof.b.rinde@uit.no. 2. Medical division, Østfold Hospital, Sarpsborg, Norway; Department of Hematology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 3. Division of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway. 4. K.G. Jebsen - Thrombosis Research and Expertise Center (TREC), Department of Clinical Medicine, UiT - The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Division of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend the use of clinical decision rules, such as Wells score, in combination with D-dimer to assess the need for objective imaging to rule out deep vein thrombosis (DVT). However, the clinical decision rule has limitations, and use of D-dimer as a stand-alone test has been suggested. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the safety and efficiency of D-dimer as a stand-alone test to rule out DVT in outpatients referred with suspected DVT. METHODS: We collected data from consecutive outpatients referred to our hospital with suspected DVT in 2008-2018. D-dimer levels were analyzed using STA® Liatest® D-Di assay. D-dimer as a stand-alone test was theoretically applied in retrospect, and the number of misdiagnosed events were estimated as if such an approach had been initially used. All patients were followed for three months. RESULTS: Of 1765 included patients, 293 (16.6%) were diagnosed with DVT. A total of 491 patients (27.8%) had a negative D-dimer (<500 ng/mL). Of these, nine were diagnosed with DVT, yielding a failure rate for D-dimer as a stand-alone test of 1.8% (95% CI 0.8%-3.5%). The majority of the misdiagnosed patients had distal DVT. In analyses restricted to proximal DVTs, the failure rate was 0.6% (95% CI 0.1%-1.8%). D-dimer as a stand-alone approach reduced the proportion of required ultrasounds from 81.8% to 72.2%. CONCLUSION: D-dimer as a stand-alone test may be safe for excluding proximal DVT and reduce the proportion of required ultrasounds. Prospective management studies are needed to confirm our findings.
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend the use of clinical decision rules, such as Wells score, in combination with D-dimer to assess the need for objective imaging to rule out deep vein thrombosis (DVT). However, the clinical decision rule has limitations, and use of D-dimer as a stand-alone test has been suggested. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the safety and efficiency of D-dimer as a stand-alone test to rule out DVT in outpatients referred with suspected DVT. METHODS: We collected data from consecutive outpatients referred to our hospital with suspected DVT in 2008-2018. D-dimer levels were analyzed using STA® Liatest® D-Di assay. D-dimer as a stand-alone test was theoretically applied in retrospect, and the number of misdiagnosed events were estimated as if such an approach had been initially used. All patients were followed for three months. RESULTS: Of 1765 included patients, 293 (16.6%) were diagnosed with DVT. A total of 491 patients (27.8%) had a negative D-dimer (<500 ng/mL). Of these, nine were diagnosed with DVT, yielding a failure rate for D-dimer as a stand-alone test of 1.8% (95% CI 0.8%-3.5%). The majority of the misdiagnosed patients had distal DVT. In analyses restricted to proximal DVTs, the failure rate was 0.6% (95% CI 0.1%-1.8%). D-dimer as a stand-alone approach reduced the proportion of required ultrasounds from 81.8% to 72.2%. CONCLUSION: D-dimer as a stand-alone test may be safe for excluding proximal DVT and reduce the proportion of required ultrasounds. Prospective management studies are needed to confirm our findings.
Authors: Peter Kubatka; Alena Mazurakova; Lenka Koklesova; Marek Samec; Juraj Sokol; Samson Mathews Samuel; Erik Kudela; Kamil Biringer; Ondrej Bugos; Martin Pec; Barbara Link; Marian Adamkov; Karel Smejkal; Dietrich Büsselberg; Olga Golubnitschaja Journal: EPMA J Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 8.836
Authors: Joseph R Bledsoe; Daniel Knox; Ithan D Peltan; Scott C Woller; James F Lloyd; Gregory L Snow; Benjamin D Horne; Jean M Connors; Jeffrey A Kline Journal: Clin Appl Thromb Hemost Date: 2022 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.512
Authors: Synne G Fronas; Camilla T Jørgensen; Anders E A Dahm; Hilde S Wik; Jostein Gleditsch; Nezar Raouf; René Holst; F A Klok; Waleed Ghanima Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-10-27