Key result
The D-dimer assay demonstrated high sensitivity (98%) and negative predictive value (97%) for excluding pulmonary embolism in oncologic patients.
Why the study?
Does the D-dimer assay accurately exclude pulmonary embolism in high-risk oncologic patients suspected of having PE?
Observational (n=201)
Does the D-dimer assay accurately exclude pulmonary embolism in high-risk oncologic patients suspected of having PE?
A negative D-dimer assay has a high negative predictive value (97%) and can be reliably used to exclude pulmonary embolism in high-risk oncologic patients.
May support ruling out PE with negative D-dimer in oncologic patients; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate (a) the diagnostic performance of D-dimer assay for pulmonary embolism (PE) in an oncologic population by using computed tomographic (CT) pulmonary angiography as the reference standard, (b) the association between PE location and assay sensitivity, and (c) the association between assay results and clinical factors that raise suspicion of PE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant study had institutional review board approval; informed consent was obtained. Five hundred thirty-one consecutive patients were clinically suspected of having PE; 201 were enrolled (72 men, 129 women; median age, 61 years) and underwent CT pulmonary angiography and D-dimer assay. Relevant clinical history, symptoms, and signs were recorded. CT images were interpreted, and the location of emboli was recorded. The negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic likelihood ratios of the D-dimer assay results were calculated. RESULTS: Forty-three patients (21%) had pulmonary emboli at CT. D-Dimer results were positive in 171 patents (85%). The NPV and sensitivity were 97% and 98%, respectively. The specificity and PPV were 18% and 25%, respectively. No association was shown between clinical history, symptoms, or signs and NPV, PPV, sensitivity, or specificity or between location of PE and sensitivity. CONCLUSION: D-Dimer results have high NPV and sensitivity for PE in oncologic patients and, if negative, can be used to exclude PE in this population. Combining the assay with clinical symptoms and signs did not substantially change NPV, PPV, sensitivity, or specificity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
King et al. (2008) conducted an observational in Pulmonary embolism in oncologic patients (n=201). D-dimer assay vs. CT pulmonary angiography was evaluated on Diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV) for pulmonary embolism. The D-dimer assay demonstrated high sensitivity (98%) and negative predictive value (97%) for excluding pulmonary embolism in oncologic patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: