Normal D-dimer levels in emergency department patients suspected of acute pulmonary embolism

被引:106
作者
Dunn, KL
Wolf, JP
Dorfman, DM
Fitzpatrick, P
Baker, JL
Goldhaber, SZ
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Med,Cardiovasc Div, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Harvard Univ, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Pathol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Harvard Univ, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Sch Med, Hematol Lab, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Harvard Univ, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Emergency Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02172-1
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES We sought to determine: 1) whether normal D-dimer enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assays predicted the absence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in the high-volume emergency department (ED) of the Brigham and Women's Hospital, and 2) whether ED physicians accepted normal D-dimer levels as confirmation of no PE without further diagnostic testing such as lung scanning, chest computed tomography (CT) scanning, or pulmonary angiography. BACKGROUND Although the plasma D-dimer ELISA is a sensitive screening test for excluding acute PE, this laboratory marker has not been widely integrated into clinical algorithms such as creatine kinase-MB fraction or troponin testing for acute myocardial infarction. METHODS We mandated that ED physicians order D-dimer ELISA tests on all patients suspected of acute PE. We reviewed the clinical record of each ED patient initially evaluated for suspected PE during the year 2000. We determined whether additional imaging tests for PE were obtained and whether the final diagnosis was PE. RESULTS Of 1,106 D-dimer assays, 559 were elevated and 547 were normal. Only 2 of 547 had PE despite a normal D-dimer. The sensitivity of the D-dimer ELISA for acute PE was 96.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.5% to 99.6%), and the negative predictive value was 99.6% (95% CI: 98.7% to >99.9%). Nevertheless, 24% of patients with normal D-dimers had additional imaging tests for PE. CONCLUSIONS The D-dimer ELISA has a high negative predictive value for excluding PE. By paying more attention to normal D-dimer results, fewer chest CT scans and lung scans will be required, and improvements may be realized in diagnostic efficiency and cost reduction. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:1475-8). (C) 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
引用
收藏
页码:1475 / 1478
页数:4
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] Bounameaux H., 2002, THROMBOSIS THROMBOEM, P225
  • [2] de Moerloose P, 2001, THROMB HAEMOSTASIS, V85, P185
  • [3] A negative SimpliRED D-dimer assay result does not exclude the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolus in emergency department patients
    Farrell, S
    Hayes, T
    Shaw, M
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2000, 35 (02) : 121 - 125
  • [4] Gelfand Eli V, 2002, Crit Pathw Cardiol, V1, P26, DOI 10.1097/00132577-200203000-00006
  • [5] QUANTITATIVE PLASMA D-DIMER LEVELS AMONG PATIENTS UNDERGOING PULMONARY ANGIOGRAPHY FOR SUSPECTED PULMONARY-EMBOLISM
    GOLDHABER, SZ
    SIMONS, GR
    ELLIOTT, CG
    HAIRE, WD
    TOLTZIS, R
    BLACKLOW, SC
    DOOLITTLE, MH
    WEINBERG, DS
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1993, 270 (23): : 2819 - 2822
  • [6] The impact of the introduction of a rapid D-dimer assay on the diagnostic evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism
    Goldstein, NM
    Kollef, MH
    Ward, S
    Gage, BF
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 161 (04) : 567 - 571
  • [7] GOTTSCHALK A, 1993, J NUCL MED, V34, P1119
  • [8] Spiral computed tomography of pulmonary embolism
    Herold, CJ
    [J]. EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2002, 19 : 13S - 21S
  • [9] Role of D-dimers in diagnosis of venous thromboembolism
    Kelly, J
    Hunt, BJ
    [J]. LANCET, 2002, 359 (9305) : 456 - 458
  • [10] Diagnostic accuracy of a bedside D-dimer assay and alveolar dead-space measurement for rapid exclusion of pulmonary embolism - A multicenter study
    Kline, JA
    Israel, EG
    Michelson, EA
    O'Neil, BJ
    Plewa, MC
    Portelli, DC
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2001, 285 (06): : 761 - 768