VIDAS D-dimer in combination with clinical pre-test probability to rule out pulmonary embolism

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Clinical outcome studies have shown that it is safe to withhold anticoagulant therapy in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) who have a negative D-dimer result and a low pre-test probability (PTP) either using a PTP model or clinical gestalt. It was the objective of the present study to assess the safety of the combination of a negative VIDAS^© D-dimer result in combination with a non-high PTP using the Wells or Geneva models to exclude PE. A systematic literature search strategy was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and all EBM Reviews. Seven studies (6 prospective management studies and 1 randomised controlled trial) reporting failure rates at three months were included in the analysis. Non-high PTP was defined as “unlikely” using the Wells’ model, or “low/intermediate” PTP using either the Geneva score, the Revised Geneva Score, or clinical gestalt. Two reviewers independently extracted data onto standardised forms. A total of 5,622 patients with low/intermediate or unlikely PTP were assessed using the VIDAS D-dimer. PE was ruled out by a negative D-dimer test in 2,248 (40%, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 38.7 to 41.3%) of them. The three-month thromboembolic risk in patients left untreated on the basis of a low/intermediate or unlikely PTP and a negative D-dimer test was 3/2,166 (0.14%, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.41%). In conclusion, the combination of a negative VIDAS D-dimer result and a non-high PTP effectively and safely excludes PE in an important proportion of outpatients with suspected PE.

• References

• 1 Laupacis Sekar N, Stiell IG. Clinical prediction rules A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. J Am Med Assoc 1997; 277: 488-494.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 2 Wells PS, Ginsberg JS, Anderson DR. et al. Use of a clinical model for safe management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Intern Med 1998; 129: 997-1005.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 3 Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger MA. et al. Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: Increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED D-dimer. Thromb Haemost 2000; 83: 416-420.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 4 Wicki J, Perneger TV, Junod A. et al. Assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism in the emergency ward: a simple score. Arch Intern Med 2001; 161: 92-97.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 5 Le Gal G, Righini M, Roy PM. et al. Prediction of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: the revised Geneva score. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144: 165-171.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 6 Chagnon I, Bounameaux H, Aujesky D. et al. Comparison of two clinical prediction rules and implicit assessment for suspected pulmonary embolism. Am J Med 2002; 113: 269-275.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 7 Klok FA, Kruisman E, Spaan J. et al. Comparison of the revised Geneva score with the Wells rule for assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost 2008; 06: 40-44.
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 8 Carrier M, Wells PS, Rodger MA. Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside with low pre-test probability and D-dimer: Safety and clinical utility of 4 methods to assign pre-test probability. Thromb Res 2006; 117: 469-474.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 9 Di Nisio M, Squizzato A, Rutjes AWS. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer test for exclusion of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 05: 296-304.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 10 Kruip MJHA, Leclercq MGL, van der Heul C. et al. Diagnostic strategies to rule out pulmonary embolism in clinical outcome studies. A systematic review. Ann Int Med 2003; 138: 941-951.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 11 Moores LK. Diagnosis and management of pulmonary embolism: are we moving toward an outcome standard?. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166: 147-148.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 12 Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D. et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm
  PubMed
• 13 Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ. et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003; 327: 557-560.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 14 Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002; 21: 1539-1558.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 15 Parent F, Maitre S, Meyer G. et al. Diagnostic value of D-dimer in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: results from a multicentre outcome study. Thromb Res 2007; 120: 195-200.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 16 Wolf SJ, McCubbin TR, Nordenholz KE. et al. Assessment of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria rule for evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism in the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 2008; 26: 181-185.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 17 Elias A, Cazanave A, Elias M. et al. Diagnostic management of pulmonary embolism using clinical assessment, plasma D-dimer assay, complete lower limb venous ultrasound and helical computed tomography of pulmonary arteries. Thromb Haemost 2005; 93: 982-988.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 18 Wolf SJ, McCubbin TR, Feldhaus KM. et al. Prospective validation of Wells Criteria in the evaluation of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Emerg Med 2004; 44: 503-510.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 19 Fünfsinn N, Caliezi C, Demarmels Biasiutti F. et al. Rapid D-dimer testing and pre-test clinical probability in the exclusion of deep venous thrombosis in symptomatic outpatients. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2001; 12: 165-170.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 20 de Monye W, Sanson BJ, Buller HR. et al. The performance of two rapid quantitative D-dimer assays in 287 patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism. Thromb Res 2002; 107: 283-286.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 21 Sijens PE, van Ingen HE, van Beek EJ. et al. Rapid ELISA assay for plasma D-dimer in the diagnosis of segmental and subsegmental pulmonary embolism. A comparison with pulmonary angiography. Thromb Haemost 2000; 84: 156-159.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 22 Miron MJ, Perrier A, Bounameaux H. et al. Contribution of noninvasive evaluation to the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in hospitalized patients. Eur Respir J 1999; 13: 1365-1370.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 23 Perrier A, Desmarais S, Goehring C. et al. D-dimer testing for suspected pulmonary embolism in out-patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997; 156: 492-496.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 24 Gibson NS, Sohne M, Kruip MJ. et al. Christopher study investigators. Further validation and simplification of the Wells clinical decision rule in pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost 2008; 99: 229-234.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 25 Righini M, Nendaz M, Le Gal G. et al. Influence of age on the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 05: 1869-1877.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 26 Kruip MJ, Sohne M, Nijkeuter M. et al. Christopher Study Investigators. A simple diagnostic strategy in hospitalized patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism. J Intern Med 2006; 260: 459-466.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 27 Sohne M, Kruip MJ, Nijkeuter M. et al. The Chris-toper Study Group. Accuracy of clinical decision rule, D-dimer and spiral computed tomography in patients with malignancy, previous venous thromboembolism, COPD or heart failure and in older patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost 2006; 04: 1042-1046.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 28 Righini M, Le Gal G, De Lucia S. et al. Clinical usefulness of D-dimer testing in cancer patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost 2006; 95: 715-719.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 29 Sohne M, Kamphuisen PW, van Mierlo PJ. et al. Diagnostic strategy using a modified clinical decision rule and D-dimer test to rule out pulmonary embolism in elderly in- and outpatients. Thromb Haemost 2005; 94: 206-210.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 30 Righini M, Aujesky D, Roy PM. et al. Clinical usefulness of D-dimer depending on clinical probability and cutoff value in outpatients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 2483-2487.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 31 Aujesky D, Hayoz D, Yersin B. et al. Exclusion of pulmonary embolism using C-reactive protein and D-dimer. A prospective comparison. Thromb Haemost 2003; 90: 1198-1203.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 32 Sanchez O, Wermert D, Faisy C. et al. Clinical probability and alveolar dead space measurement for suspected pulmonary embolism in patients with an abnormal D-dimer test result. J Thromb Haemost 2006; 04: 1517-1522.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 33 Perrier A, Howarth N, Didier D. et al. Performance of helical computed tomography in unselected out-patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Intern Med 2001; 135: 88-97.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 34 Righini M, Le Gal G, Aujesky D. et al. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism by multidetector CT alone or combined with venous ultrasonography of the leg: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2008; 371: 1343-1352.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 35 Goekoop RJ, Steeghs N, Niessen RW. et al. Simple and safe exclusion of pulmonary embolism in outpatients using quantitative D-dimer and Wells’ simplified decision rule. Thromb Haemost 2007; 97: 146-150.
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 36 van Belle A, Buller HR, Huisman MV. et al. Christopher Study Investigators. Effectiveness of managing suspected pulmonary embolism using an algorithm combining clinical probability, D-dimer testing, and computed tomography. J Am Med Assoc 2006; 295: 172-179.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 37 Perrier A, Roy PM, Sanchez O. et al. Multidetectorrow computed tomography in suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1760-1768.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 38 Steeghs N, Goekoop RJ, Niessen RW. et al. C-reactive protein and D-dimer with clinical probability score in the exclusion of pulmonary embolism. Br J Haematol 2005; 130: 614-619.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 39 Perrier A, Roy PM, Aujesky D. et al. Diagnosing pulmonary embolism in outpatients with clinical assessement, D-dimer measurement, venous ultrasound, and helical computed tomography: a multicenter management study. Am J Med 2004; 116: 291-299.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 40 Perrier A, Desmarais S, Miron MJ. et al. Non-invasive diagnosis of venous thromboembolism in out-patients. Lancet 1999; 353: 190-195.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 41 Kucher N, Kohler HP, Dornhofer T. et al. Accuracy of D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio to predict pulmonary embolism: a prospective diagnostic study. J Thromb Haemost 2003; 01: 708-713.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 42 Kruip MJ, Slob MJ, Schijen JH. et al. Use of a clinical decision rule in combination with D-dimer concentration in diagnostic workup of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a prospective management study. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 1631-1635.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 43 Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ. et al. Empirical evidence of bias. J Am Med Assoc 1995; 273: 408-412.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 44 Roy PM, Colombet I, Durieux P. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of strategies for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism. Br Med J 2005; 331: 259.
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar