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: A comparative analysis of D-dimer assays in patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism.
    Author: van Beek EJ, van den Ende B, Berckmans RJ, van der Heide YT, Brandjes DP, Sturk A, ten Cate JW.
    Journal: Thromb Haemost; 1993 Sep 01; 70(3):408-13. PubMed ID: 8259539.
    Abstract:
    To avoid angiography in patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism and non-diagnostic lung scan results, the use of D-dimer has been advocated. We assessed plasma samples of 151 consecutive patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism. Lung scan results were: normal (43), high probability (48) and non-diagnostic (60; angiography performed in 43; 12 pulmonary emboli). Reproducibility, cut-off values, specificity, and percentage of patients in whom angiography could be avoided (with sensitivity 100%) were determined for two latex and four ELISA assays. The latex methods (cut-off 500 micrograms/l) agreed with corresponding ELISA tests in 83% (15% normal latex, abnormal ELISA) and 81% (7% normal latex, abnormal ELISA). ELISA methods showed considerable within- (2-17%) and between-assay variation (12-26%). Cut-off values were 25 micrograms/l (Behring), 50 micrograms/l (Agen), 300 micrograms/l (Stago) and 550 micrograms/l (Organon). Specificity was 14-38%; in 4-15% of patients angiography could be avoided. We conclude that latex D-dimer assays appear not useful, whereas ELISA methods may be of limited value in the exclusion of pulmonary embolism.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]