Key result
D-dimer testing demonstrates ~92% sensitivity for VTE in unselected inpatients, but with poor specificity.
Why the study?
The diagnostic performance of plasma D-dimer for venous thromboembolism in unselected hospital populations is less well characterized compared to selected cohorts with suspected embolism.
What is the diagnostic accuracy of plasma D-dimer for venous thromboembolism in an unselected hospital population?
Observational (n=100)
No
What is the diagnostic accuracy of plasma D-dimer for venous thromboembolism in an unselected hospital population?
Effect estimate: Sensitivity 91.7% (95% CI 61.5-99.8)
In an unselected hospital population, plasma D-dimer maintained high sensitivity and negative predictive value for ruling out venous thromboembolism, but demonstrated low specificity, highlighting the importance of clinical pretest probability and age-adjusted thresholds.
Supports D-dimer rule-out in unselected inpatients; hypothesis-generating and needs prospective validation.
BackgroundD-dimer is a sensitive rule-out test for venous thromboembolism (VTE), but most validation data come from selected cohorts with suspected embolism, and its performance in unselected hospital populations is less well characterized.We assessed the diagnostic performance of plasma D-dimer for VTE in an unselected hospital population, with pulmonary embolism (PE) as a subgroup, and evaluated the impact of an ageadjusted D-dimer threshold. MethodsIn this one-year retrospective study (May 2025-April 2026), 100 patients were included from 143 consecutive plasma D-dimer requests at a tertiary university hospital in Tangier, Morocco, irrespective of department or clinical indication.D-dimer was measured by immunoturbidimetric assay (threshold 500 ng/mL) and compared with CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) for PE and venous Doppler ultrasound for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with a documented reference standard, with PE as a pre-specified subgroup. ResultsThe study population (53% female; mean age 55.6 years) had D-dimer requested across many departments, most often adult emergency (54%).Values were right-skewed (median 814 ng/mL); 65% were positive.Imaging confirmed thromboembolic disease in 15 patients, including 12 venous events (nine PE, three DVT), and excluded it in 26.For VTE, sensitivity was 91.7% (95% CI 61.5-99.8)and negative predictive value (NPV) 92.9% (95% CI 66.1-99.8),with specificity 50.0%(95% CI 29.9-70.1),positive predictive value (PPV) 45.8% (95% CI 25.6-67.2) and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.72 (95% CI 0.55-0.87).For PE, sensitivity and NPV both reached 100% (95% CI 66.4-100.0 and 73.5-100.0),with specificity 52.2% (95% CI 30.6-73.2).An ageadjusted D-dimer threshold raised specificity for VTE to 65.4% without loss of sensitivity. ConclusionIn this unselected hospital population, plasma D-dimer showed high sensitivity for PE but low specificity, in keeping with its established role as a rule-out test.Its use in routine practice should be guided by clinical pretest probability and, where appropriate, age-adjusted thresholds.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdesselam et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Venous thromboembolism (n=100). Plasma D-dimer testing (500 ng/mL threshold) vs. Imaging reference standard (CTPA for PE, venous Doppler ultrasound for DVT) was evaluated on Diagnostic performance for venous thromboembolism (sensitivity) (Sensitivity 91.7%, 95% CI 61.5-99.8). Plasma D-dimer testing in an unselected hospital population demonstrated a high sensitivity of 91.7% and negative predictive value of 92.9% for venous thromboembolism, alongside a low specificity of 50.0%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: