Key result
D-dimer testing across three analyzers yields mixed classification in ~26% of patients at fixed thresholds.
Why the study?
Do D-dimer results from Sysmex CS-2500 and Tokra Novae MTI analyzers agree with VIDAS 3 analyzer results in patient plasma specimens?
Observational (n=81)
Do D-dimer results from Sysmex CS-2500 and Tokra Novae MTI analyzers agree with VIDAS 3 analyzer results in patient plasma specimens?
D-dimer results are not fully interchangeable across different automated assays near clinical decision thresholds, highlighting the need for platform-specific verification.
Discordant D-dimer classifications may affect PE rule-out decisions; leaves open need for analyzer-specific thresholds or harmonization.
Background and Objective: D-dimer results differ across analytical platforms, which may affect their clinical interpretation. This study aimed to compare the analytical agreement and threshold-based classification of three routinely used D-dimer analyzers. Methods: Of 150 consecutive residual citrated plasma specimens, 81 patient specimens with valid results on the Sysmex CS-2500, Tokra Novae MTI, and VIDAS 3 analyzers were included. Agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient, Passing–Bablok regression, Bland–Altman analysis, and classification concordance at the fixed (500 ng/mL FEU) and age-adjusted thresholds. VIDAS 3 served solely as the comparator method. Results: Overall agreement was moderate to good; however, the platforms were not fully interchangeable. Sysmex CS-2500 and VIDAS 3 showed the closest agreement, with no significant constant or proportional bias, whereas Tokra Novae MTI exhibited significant proportional bias. Mixed classification across the three analyzers occurred in 21/81 patients (25.9%) at the fixed threshold and in 18/81 patients (22.2%) at the age-adjusted thresholds. Conclusions: Clinically relevant inter-platform differences persisted despite acceptable average agreement. Therefore, D-dimer results should not be regarded as interchangeable across analyzers, particularly near clinical decision thresholds, and platform-specific verification remains essential.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dündar et al. (2026) reported an observational. Sysmex CS-2500 and Tokra Novae MTI analyzers vs. VIDAS 3 analyzer was evaluated on Mixed classification across the three analyzers at the fixed threshold (500 ng/mL FEU). D-dimer testing using Sysmex CS-2500, Tokra Novae MTI, and VIDAS 3 analyzers resulted in mixed classification in 25.9% of patients at a fixed threshold and 22.2% at age-adjusted thresholds.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: