Why the study?
Does the rapid VIDAS D-dimer test accurately exclude pulmonary embolism in patients suspected of PE compared to pulmonary angiography?
Does the rapid VIDAS D-dimer test accurately exclude pulmonary embolism in patients suspected of PE compared to pulmonary angiography?
The rapid ELISA D-dimer assay showed lower sensitivity and negative predictive value for excluding PE than previously reported, possibly due to heparin pretreatment or inclusion of mild subsegmental cases.
Performance insufficient for reliable PE exclusion; leaves open the test's role pending prospective validation.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of a rapid ELISA D-dimer assay for the exclusion of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients suspected of PE, using pulmonary angiography alone as reference method rather than a diagnostic strategy including lung scintigraphy and leg vein ultrasonography. METHODS: In 342 patients who were examined by pulmonary angiography to diagnose or exclude PE, the accuracy of the quantitative rapid VIDAS D-dimer test for the exclusion of PE was evaluated retrospectively. D-dimer levels were assayed in frozen samples collected during the diagnostic work-up at the time of pulmonary angiography while on treatment with unfractionated heparin for 1-2 days. RESULTS: Mean plasma D-dimer concentrations were increased in patients with angiographic evidence of PE (P <0.0001). The sensitivity of D-dimer for segmental PE was 98%, its accuracy in excluding segmental PE was 99%, higher than the respective figures for subsegmental PE (76% and 94%; P <0.01, both). For both forms of PE combined the sensitivity was 90% and the negative predictive value 94%. DISCUSSION: The sensitivity and negative predictive values reported here, are low compared with previous studies using the same rapid ELISA D-dimer assay. This probably reflects an overlooking of mild cases of subsegmental PE in previous studies, although a reduction of D-dimer levels by the heparin pretreatment may have contributed to part of the discrepancy. Prospective studies are needed to clarify this issue.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2000 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: