Key result
Impedance plethysmography yields ~99% NPV in low-probability suspected DVT and high PPV in high-probability cases.
Why the study?
How does clinical probability influence the utility of noninvasive diagnostic tests for deep vein thrombosis?
Population
Patients suspected to have deep vein thrombosis (DVT)
Comparison
Noninvasive diagnostic tests vs Venography
Design
Review
Authors
Loading...
Supports pretest probability integration for DVT test interpretation; leaves open impedance plethysmography's role versus ultrasonography today.
How does clinical probability influence the utility of noninvasive diagnostic tests for deep vein thrombosis?
Clinical probability of disease strongly influences the predictive value of diagnostic tests for DVT, and noninvasive tests like ultrasonography should be considered the diagnostic standard.
H. B. Wheeler (1994) conducted a review in Deep vein thrombosis. Noninvasive diagnostic tests (ultrasonography, impedance plethysmography) vs. Venography was evaluated. In patients with suspected DVT, the negative predictive value of impedance plethysmography approaches 99% in low-probability patients, and its positive predictive value reaches 97% in high-probability patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: