Literature DB >> 8772213

Comparison of the accuracy of impedance plethysmography and compression ultrasonography in outpatients with clinically suspected deep vein thrombosis. A two centre paired-design prospective trial.

P S Wells1, J Hirsh, D R Anderson, A W Lensing, G Foster, C Kearon, J Weitz, A Cogo, P Prandoni, T Minuk.   

Abstract

Impedance plethysmography (IPG) and compression ultrasonography (CUS) have been reported to be highly accurate for the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in symptomatic patients. In many centres CUS has become the method of choice. However, direct comparisons of the accuracy of IPG to CUS have not been performed. To determine the test of choice we performed a two centre prospective comparison of IPG and CUS, with venography, and determined how the size and distribution of thrombi influenced the accuracy of each test. 495 symptomatic outpatients with suspected DVT had evaluable venograms. The prevalence of DVT was 27% (130/495), 84% (109) of which were proximal. The sensitivity of IPG and CUS for proximal vein thrombosis was 77% and 90% respectively (p = .002). The specificity of IPG was 93% whereas the specificity of CUS was 98% (p = 0.04). There were significant differences in accuracy between the two centres as a consequence of differences in the size and location of thrombi The majority of proximal thrombi not detected by IPG and CUS involved less than 5 cm of the distal half of the popliteal vein and most of these thrombi occurred in one centre. Exclusion of these thrombi from the analysis increases the sensitivity of CUS to 99% (86/87) and IPG to 91% (72/79), for proximal thrombi (P = .019). The positive predictive value of CUS was strongly influenced by the number of abnormal venous segments (three sites were examined); 100% (80/80) if two or three sites were abnormal, but only 68% if a single site was involved. We conclude that: 1) CUS is more accurate than the IPG for the diagnosis of DVT in symptomatic outpatients, and this relationship holds true regardless of the size or location of the DVT, 2) the sensitivities of IPG and CUS are much lower for small proximal DVT, and 3) confirmatory venography is warranted if the abnormality with CUS is limited to one venous segment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8772213

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 0340-6245            Impact factor:   5.249


  8 in total

Review 1.  Advances in the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism a multimodal approach.

Authors:  S D Chunilal; J S Ginsberg
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: diagnosis of venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Wendy Lim; Grégoire Le Gal; Shannon M Bates; Marc Righini; Linda B Haramati; Eddy Lang; Jeffrey A Kline; Sonja Chasteen; Marcia Snyder; Payal Patel; Meha Bhatt; Parth Patel; Cody Braun; Housne Begum; Wojtek Wiercioch; Holger J Schünemann; Reem A Mustafa
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-11-27

Review 3.  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

4.  Safety of withholding anticoagulation in pregnant women with suspected deep vein thrombosis following negative serial compression ultrasound and iliac vein imaging.

Authors:  Wee-Shian Chan; Frederick A Spencer; Agnes Y Y Lee; Sanjeev Chunilal; James D Douketis; Marc Rodger; Jeffrey S Ginsberg
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2013-01-14       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy.

Authors:  Meha Bhatt; Cody Braun; Payal Patel; Parth Patel; Housne Begum; Wojtek Wiercioch; Jamie Varghese; David Wooldridge; Hani J Alturkmani; Merrill Thomas; Mariam Baig; Waled Bahaj; Rasha Khatib; Rohan Kehar; Rakesh Ponnapureddy; Anchal Sethi; Ahmad Mustafa; Robby Nieuwlaat; Wendy Lim; Shannon M Bates; Eddy Lang; Grégoire Le Gal; Marc Righini; Nedaa M Husainat; Mohamad A Kalot; Yazan Nayif Al Jabiri; Holger J Schünemann; Reem A Mustafa
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2020-04-14

6.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Steve Goodacre; Fiona Sampson; Steve Thomas; Edwin van Beek; Alex Sutton
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2005-10-03       Impact factor: 1.930

7.  Multimodality imaging of the peripheral venous system.

Authors:  Diana Gaitini
Journal:  Int J Biomed Imaging       Date:  2007

8.  Diagnostic accuracy of three ultrasonography strategies for deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremity: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Noémie Kraaijpoel; Marc Carrier; Grégoire Le Gal; Matthew D F McInnes; Jean-Paul Salameh; Trevor A McGrath; Nick van Es; David Moher; Harry R Büller; Patrick M Bossuyt; Mariska M G Leeflang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.