Key result
Serum adropin shows only modest diagnostic accuracy for acute pulmonary embolism.
Why the study?
Rapid diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism is critical, but overuse of computed tomography pulmonary angiography raises concerns about radiation and costs, motivating evaluation of serum adropin as a diagnostic biomarker.
Does serum adropin accurately diagnose acute pulmonary embolism in emergency department patients with suspected PE?
Cross-Sectional (n=120)
Does serum adropin accurately diagnose acute pulmonary embolism in emergency department patients with suspected PE?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.612 (95% CI 0.510-0.714)
p-value: p=0.032
Serum adropin has limited accuracy as a standalone diagnostic marker for acute pulmonary embolism, though it may serve as a complementary biomarker in specific patient subsets.
Adropin shows insufficient diagnostic accuracy for acute PE to guide decisions; leaves open adjunctive biomarker potential pending prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially life-threatening condition requiring rapid diagnosis and management. While computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the gold standard for diagnosis, its overuse raises concerns about radiation exposure and healthcare costs. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of serum adropin (ADR) levels in patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute PE. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional study included 120 patients who underwent CTPA due to suspected PE. Serum ADR levels were measured using ELISA. Patients were stratified by Wells score into low, moderate, and high-risk groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ADR for predicting PE. RESULTS: Of the 120 patients, 40% had confirmed PE (n = 48) of patients. Median ADR levels were lower in patients with PE than in those without PTE (419, IQR: 270 - 512 vs. 481.6, IQR: 375 - 606, respectively; p = 0.03). This was also true for patients with chronic disease when compared to patients without chronic disease (413, IQR: 264 - 534 vs. 500, IQR: 433 - 685, respectively; p = 0.01). ROC analysis revealed an AUC value of 0.612 (95% CI: 0.510 - 0.714; p = 0.032) for ADR in diagnosing PE. CONCLUSIONS: While ADR alone is insufficient as a primary diagnostic tool for PE, it may serve as a complementary biomarker particularly in D-dimer positive patients with low clinical probability at specific cutoff values. However, prospective studies are warranted to validate this approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gulen et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Suspected acute pulmonary embolism (n=120). Serum adropin (ADR) was evaluated on Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (AUC 0.612, 95% CI 0.510-0.714, p=0.032). Serum adropin levels demonstrated modest diagnostic accuracy for predicting acute pulmonary embolism (AUC 0.612; 95% CI 0.510-0.714; p=0.032).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: