• M J Kovacs, K M MacKinnon, D Anderson, K O'Rourke, M Keeney, C Kearon, J Ginsberg, and P S Wells.
• Department of Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada. michael.kovacs@lhsc.on.ca
• Br. J. Haematol. 2001 Oct 1; 115 (1): 140-4.

AbstractWe compared three rapid D-dimer methods for the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism. Patients presenting to four teaching hospitals with the possible diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism were investigated with a combination of clinical likelihood, D-dimer (SimpliRED) and initial non-invasive testing. Patients were assigned as being positive or negative for deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism based on their three-month outcome and initial test results. The three D-dimer methods compared were: (a) Accuclot D-dimer (b) IL-Test D-dimer (c) SimpliRED D-dimer. Of 993 patients, 141 had objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. The sensitivity of SimpliRED, Accuclot and IL-Test were 79, 90 and 87% respectively. All three D-dimer tests gave similar negative predictive values. The SimpliRED D-dimer was found to be less sensitive than the Accuclot or IL-Test. When combined with pre-test probability all three methods are probably acceptable for use in the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism.

13 keywords...

hide…