Key result
Age-adjusted D-dimer safely rules out DVT in ~7% more patients with no false negatives.
Why the study?
Age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff increases diagnostic yield in suspected pulmonary embolism, but had not been prospectively validated to safely rule out suspected leg DVT.
Does an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff safely rule out DVT in outpatients presenting to the emergency department with suspected DVT?
Does an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff safely rule out DVT in outpatients presenting to the emergency department with suspected DVT?
The age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff safely rules out DVT and increases the proportion of patients avoiding imaging, particularly among those aged 75 years or older.
Supports safe DVT rule-out without imaging in elderly ED patients; extends age-adjusted D-dimer evidence from PE to DVT cohorts.
Importance: The age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff (age × 10 µg/L in patients 50 years or older), safely increases the diagnostic yield of D-dimer in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism but has not been validated in patients with suspected leg deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Objective: To prospectively validate whether using an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff allows clinicians to safely rule out DVT. Design, setting, and patients: Multicenter, multinational prospective management outcome study conducted in 27 centers in Belgium, Canada, France, and Switzerland between January 2015 and October 2022 (last follow-up visit, January 30, 2023) and including outpatients presenting to the emergency department with suspected DVT. Interventions: Patients were assessed by a sequential diagnostic strategy based on the assessment of clinical pretest probability by the Wells score, a highly sensitive D-dimer test, and leg compression ultrasonography. Patients in whom DVT was ruled out were followed up for a 3-month period. Main outcome and measure: The primary outcome was the rate of adjudicated symptomatic venous thromboembolic events during follow-up in patients in whom DVT was ruled out based on a D-dimer value between the conventional cutoff of 500 µg/L and their age-adjusted cutoff. Results: A total of 3205 patients were included. Median age was 59 years, and 1737 (54%) were female. DVT prevalence was 14%. Among the 2169 patients with a non-high or unlikely clinical probability, 531 (24.5% [95% CI, 22.7%-26.4%]) had a D-dimer level less than 500 µg/L, and 161 additional patients (7.4% [95% CI, 6.4%-8.6%]) had a D-dimer level between 500 µg/L and their age-adjusted cutoff. No failures were identified in patients with a D-dimer level 500 µg/L or greater but below the age-adjusted cutoff (0% [95% CI, 0%-2.3%]). Among patients 75 years or older, using the age-adjusted cutoff instead of the 500-µg/L cutoff increased the proportion of negative D-dimer from 33 of 379 (8.7% [95% CI, 6.3%-12.0%]) to 99 of 379 (26.1% [95% CI, 22.0%-30.8%]), without any false-negative test results. Conclusions and relevance: The age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff may safely rule out DVT and was associated with a larger number of patients in whom DVT could be effectively ruled out. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02384135.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gal et al. (2026) studied this question. Using an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff safely ruled out DVT in 7.4% more patients with no false negatives, increasing negative results to 26.1% in those ≥75 years.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: