These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The predictive characteristics of D-dimer testing in outpatients with suspected venous thromboembolism: a Bayesian approach.
    Author: Risch L, Monn A, Lüthy R, Honegger H, Huber AR.
    Journal: Clin Chim Acta; 2004 Jul; 345(1-2):79-87. PubMed ID: 15193980.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread use of quantitative methods to measure D-dimer, clinical decisions commonly are based only on binary test information (positive/negative). This study aimed to determine the significance of quantitative D-dimer results in the evaluation of venous thromboembolism (VTE) by means of a differentiated Bayesian approach. METHODS: Prospective study in 118 outpatients referred for workup of suspected pulmonary embolism (n = 75) or deep vein thrombosis (n = 43). The sensitivity and specificity of D-dimer results obtained by DD VIDAS (Biomerieux, France), STA Liatest (Diagnostica Stago, France), and D-dimer plus (Dade, US) were assessed for five different cut-offs. Further, predictive values and multilevel likelihood ratios were calculated in order to assess the operative test characteristics in excluding or confirming VTE. RESULTS: At a cut-off of 500 ng/ml and pretest probabilities < 47%, the VIDAS provides a negative predictive value (NPV) > 95%, whereas a positive predictive value (PPV) > 95% is obtained in patients with a D-dimer > 10,000 ng/ml and pretest probabilities > 50%. At a cut-off of 500 ng/ml and pretest probabilities < 33%, the Liatest exhibits a NPV > 95%, whereas a PPV > 95% is obtained in patients with a D-dimer >10,000 ng/ml and pretest probabilities > 37%. Finally, with the D-dimer plus, a NPV > 95% is seen at a cut-off of 150 ng/ml and pretest probabilities < 30%, whereas a PPV > 95% is obtained at a cut-off > 1000 ng/ml and pretest probabilities > 67%. CONCLUSIONS: D-dimer measurements in outpatients cannot only allow for exclusion but, in some situations, also for confirmation of venous thromboembolism. It is therefore advisable to conduct a quantitative interpretation of D-dimer results.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]