• Semin. Thromb. Hemost. · Oct 2006

    Review Comparative Study

    Different accuracies of rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent, turbidimetric, and agglutination D-dimer assays for thrombosis exclusion: impact on diagnostic work-ups of outpatients with suspected deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

    • Jan J Michiels, Alain Gadisseur, Marc van der Planken, Wilfried Schroyens, Marianne De Maeseneer, Jan T Hermsen, Paul H Trienekens, Henk Hoogsteden, and Peter M P Pattynama.
    • Hemostasis and Thrombosis Research, Department of Hematology, University Hospital Antwerp, Belgium. postbus@goodheartcenter.demon.nl
    • Semin. Thromb. Hemost. 2006 Oct 1;32(7):678-93.

    AbstractThe requirement for a safe diagnostic strategy should be based on an overall posttest incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of less than 1%, with a negative predictive value of more than 99 to 100% during 3-month follow-up. Compression ultrasonography (CUS) and spiral computed tomography (CT) currently are the methods of choice to confirm or rule out deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), respectively. CUS has a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97 to 98%, indicating the need to improve the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspected DVT by clinical score assessment and D-dimer testing. Spiral CT as a stand-alone method detects all clinically relevant PEs and a large number of alternative diagnoses. It rules out PE with a NPV of 98 to 99%. Spiral CT is expensive, emphasizing the need to improve the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspected PE by the use of clinical score assessment and D-dimer testing. Clinical score assessment for DVT and PE has not safely ruled out VTE in multicenter studies and in routine daily practices. Modification of the Wells clinical score assessment for DVT by elimination of the "minus 2 points" for alternative diagnosis will improve the reproducibility of the clinical score assessment. The combination of a first negative CUS and a negative SimpliRed or an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) VIDAS D-dimer of < 1,000 ng/mL safely exclude DVT (NPV > 99%) irrespective of clinical score assessment and without the need to repeat CUS in approximately 60 to 70% of patients. The rapid quantitative and qualitative agglutination D-dimer assays for the exclusion of VTE are not sensitive enough as stand-alone tests and should be used in combination with clinical score assessment. A normal rapid ELISA VIDAS D-dimer test as a stand-alone test safely excludes DVT and PE, with a NPV of 99 to 100%, irrespective of clinical score, without the need of CUS or spiral CT. The combined strategy of a rapid ELISA VIDAS D-dimer followed by objective testing with CUS for DVT and by spiral CT for PE will reduce the need for noninvasive imaging techniques by 40 to 50%.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.