Key result
Empirical pretest probability estimation improves DVT diagnostic accuracy vs Wells score, ruling out ~50% more patients.
Why the study?
The comparative accuracy and efficiency of empirical estimation versus the Wells score for clinical pretest probability in suspected DVT patients is not well understood.
Does empirical estimation of clinical pretest probability improve diagnostic accuracy and D-dimer efficiency compared to the Wells score in patients with suspected DVT?
Observational (n=555)
Does empirical estimation of clinical pretest probability improve diagnostic accuracy and D-dimer efficiency compared to the Wells score in patients with suspected DVT?
Empirical estimation of pretest probability may improve diagnostic accuracy and D-dimer assay efficiency for excluding DVT compared to the widely used Wells score.
Empirical estimation may support higher D-dimer thresholds and rule out more suspected DVT cases than Wells score; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
Wells score has been validated for estimation of pretest probability in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis (DVT). In clinical practice, many clinicians prefer to use empirical estimation rather than Wells score. However, which method is better to increase the accuracy of clinical evaluation is not well understood. Our present study compared empirical estimation of pretest probability with the Wells score to investigate the efficiency of empirical estimation in the diagnostic process of DVT. Five hundred and fifty-five patients were enrolled in this study. One hundred and fifty patients were assigned to examine the interobserver agreement for Wells score between emergency and vascular clinicians. The other 405 patients were assigned to evaluate the pretest probability of DVT on the basis of the empirical estimation and Wells score, respectively, and plasma D-dimer levels were then determined in the low-risk patients. All patients underwent venous duplex scans and had a 45-day follow up. Weighted Cohen's κ value for interobserver agreement between emergency and vascular clinicians of the Wells score was 0.836. Compared with Wells score evaluation, empirical assessment increased the sensitivity, specificity, Youden's index, positive likelihood ratio, and positive and negative predictive values, but decreased negative likelihood ratio. In addition, the appropriate D-dimer cutoff value based on Wells score was 175 μg/l and 108 patients were excluded. Empirical assessment increased the appropriate D-dimer cutoff point to 225 μg/l and 162 patients were ruled out. Our findings indicated that empirical estimation not only improves D-dimer assay efficiency for exclusion of DVT but also increases clinical judgement accuracy in the diagnosis of DVT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Suspected deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (n=555). Empirical estimation of clinical pretest probability vs. Wells score was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy and D-dimer assay efficiency. Empirical estimation of pretest probability improved diagnostic accuracy and increased the D-dimer cutoff to 225 μg/l (ruling out 162 patients) vs 175 μg/l (108 patients) for the Wells score.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: