Clinical usefulness and safety of an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels to exclude pulmonary embolism: a retrospective analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Julio Flores
Jaime García de Tena
Javier Galipienzo
Ángel García-Avello
Esteban Pérez-Rodríguez
José Ignacio Tortuero
Concepción Álvarez
Antonio Ruíz
Ignacio Arribas
机构
[1] Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias,Sección de Neumología
[2] Hospital Universitario de Guadalajara,Servicio de Medicina Interna
[3] MD Anderson,Servicio de Anestesiología y Reanimación
[4] Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal,Servicio de Hematología y Hemoterapia
[5] Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal,Servicio de Neumología
[6] Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias,Servicio de Análisis Clínicos
[7] Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias,Servicio de Radiología
[8] Universidad de Alcalá,Departamento de Medicina, Facultad de Medicina
来源
关键词
Pulmonary embolism; Diagnosis; Age-adjusted D-dimer; Clinical usefulness; Safety;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Age-adjusted D-dimer (AADD) appears to increase the proportion of patients in whom pulmonary embolism (PE) can safely be excluded compared with conventional D-dimer (CDD), according to a limited number of studies. The aim if this study was to assess whether the use of an AADD might safely increase the clinical usefulness of CDD for the diagnosis of PE in our setting. Three hundred and sixty two consecutive outpatients with clinically suspected PE in whom plasma samples were obtained to measure D-dimer were included in this post hoc analysis of a previous study. CDD cutoff value was 500 ng/mL and AADD was calculated as (patient’s age × 10) ng/mL in patients aged >50. Sensitivity, specificity, clinical usefulness (i.e., proportion of true-negative tests among all patients with suspected PE), and the proportion of false negatives were calculated for both AADD and CDD among patients with low-to-moderate clinical probability of PE according to Well’s criteria. PE was confirmed in 98 patients (27 %). Among 331 patients with low-to-moderate clinical probability of PE, sensitivity and clinical usefulness were 100 and 27.8 % for CDD, respectively, and 100 and 36.5 % for AADD, respectively. In 29 patients aged >50 with CDD >500 ng/mL, AADD showed values under its normal cutoff point, without false negatives for the diagnosis of PE (0 %, 95 % CI 0–11 %). AADD increases clinical usefulness notably with respect to that of CDD in patients with clinical suspected PE without losing sensitivity in our cohort. The use of AADD apparently does not reduce the safety of CDD for the exclusion of PE.
引用
收藏
页码:69 / 75
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Clinical usefulness and safety of an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels to exclude pulmonary embolism: a retrospective analysis
    Flores, Julio
    Garcia de Tena, Jaime
    Galipienzo, Javier
    Garcia-Avello, Angel
    Perez-Rodriguez, Esteban
    Ignacio Tortuero, Jose
    Alvarez, Concepcion
    Ruiz, Antonio
    Arribas, Ignacio
    [J]. INTERNAL AND EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2016, 11 (01) : 69 - 75
  • [2] Is It Time to Raise the Bar? Age-Adjusted D-dimer Cutoff Levels to Exclude Pulmonary Embolism
    Kirschner, Jonathan M.
    Kline, Jeffrey A.
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2014, 64 (01) : 86 - 87
  • [3] Age-Adjusted D-Dimer Cutoff Levels and Pulmonary Embolism Reply
    Righini, Marc
    Kamphuisen, Pieter W.
    Le Gal, Gregoire
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2014, 312 (05): : 557 - 558
  • [4] Age-adjusted versus clinical probability-adjusted D-dimer to exclude pulmonary embolism
    Lapner, Sarah Takach
    Stevens, Scott M.
    Woller, Scott C.
    Snow, Gregory
    Kearon, Clive
    [J]. THROMBOSIS RESEARCH, 2018, 167 : 15 - 19
  • [5] Comparison of the age-adjusted and clinical probability-adjusted D-dimer to exclude pulmonary embolism in the ED
    Sharif, Sameer
    Eventov, Michelle
    Kearon, Clive
    Parpia, Sameer
    Li, Meirui
    Jiang, River
    Sneath, Paula
    Fuentes, Carmen Otero
    Marriott, Christopher
    de Wit, Kerstin
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2019, 37 (05): : 845 - 850
  • [6] Is It Time to Raise the Bar? Age-Adjusted D-dimer Cutoff Levels for Excluding Pulmonary Embolism
    Kirschner, Jonathan
    Kline, Jeffrey
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2014, 64 (06) : 678 - 683
  • [7] Assessment of the Safety and Efficiency of Using an Age-Adjusted D-dimer Threshold to Exclude Suspected Pulmonary Embolism
    Woller, Scott C.
    Stevens, Scott M.
    Adams, Daniel M.
    Evans, R. Scott
    Lloyd, James F.
    Snow, Gregory L.
    Bledsoe, Joseph R.
    Gay, David Z.
    Patten, Richard M.
    Aston, Valerie T.
    Elliott, C. Gregory
    [J]. CHEST, 2014, 146 (06) : 1444 - 1451
  • [8] A retrospective evaluation of the age-adjusted d-dimer versus the conventional d-dimer for pulmonary embolism
    Sheele, Johnathan M.
    Tang, Annie
    Farhan, Obada
    Morris, Nathan
    [J]. BLOOD COAGULATION & FIBRINOLYSIS, 2018, 29 (03) : 344 - 349
  • [9] Age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A cost-effectiveness analysis
    Blondon, Marc
    Le Gal, Gregoire
    Meyer, Guy
    Righini, Marc
    Robert-Ebadi, Helia
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2020, 18 (04) : 865 - 875
  • [10] Diagnostic Accuracy of Age-Adjusted D-Dimer Cutoff in Suspected Cases of Pulmonary Embolism
    Dhakal, Prajwal
    Iftikhar, Harris Mian
    Wang, Ling
    Panthi, Sagar
    Shrotriya, Shiva
    Rayamajhi, Supratik
    [J]. BLOOD, 2018, 132