Factors Associated With Positive D‐dimer Results in Patients Evaluated for Pulmonary Embolism

Abstract

Objectives Available D-dimer assays have low specificity and may increase radiographic testing for pulmonary embolism (PE). To help clinicians better target testing, this study sought to quantify the effect of risk factors for a positive quantitative D-dimer in patients evaluated for PE. Methods This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Emergency department (ED) patients evaluated for PE with a quantitative D-dimer were eligible for inclusion. The main outcome of interest was a positive D-dimer. Odds ratio (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined by multivariable logistic regression. Adjusted estimates of relative risk were also calculated. Results A total of 4,346 patients had D-dimer testing, of whom 2,930 (67%) were women. A total of 2,500 (57%) were white, 1,474 (34%) were black or African American, 238 (6%) were Hispanic, and 144 (3%) were of other race or ethnicity. The mean (±SD) age was 48 (±17) years. Overall, 1,903 (44%) D-dimers were positive. Model fit was adequate (c-statistic = 0.739, Hosmer and Lemeshow p-value = 0.13). Significant positive predictors of D-dimer positive included female sex; increasing age; black (vs. white) race; cocaine use; general, limb, or neurologic immobility; hemoptysis; hemodialysis; active malignancy; rheumatoid arthritis; lupus; sickle cell disease; prior venous thromboembolism (VTE; not under treatment); pregnancy and postpartum state; and abdominal, chest, orthopedic, or other surgery. Warfarin use was protective. In contrast, several variables known to be associated with PE were not associated with positive D-dimer results: body mass index (BMI), estrogen use, family history of PE, (inactive) malignancy, thrombophilia, trauma within 4 weeks, travel, and prior VTE (under treatment). Conclusions Many factors are associated with a positive D-dimer test. The effect of these factors on the usefulness of the test should be considered prior to ordering a D-dimer.

A New D-dimer Cutoff Value to Improve the Exclusion of Deep Vein Thrombosis in Cancer Patients

“…The new cutoff minimize radiation exposure by eliminating unnecessary scans, thus the slightly reduced sensitivity could be neglected. Similarly, other reports identified that base lines of D-dimer were higher in the elderly (Smith-Bindman et al, 2009;Duriseti et al, 2010;Kabrhel et al, 2010).…”

Diabetes mellitus: A review of some of the prognostic markers of response to treatment and management

“…While a negative result practically rules out thrombosis, a positive result can indicate thrombosis but does not rule out other possible or potential causes, for example pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, malignancy, pregnancy and so on. 62 Its main use, therefore, is to exclude thromboembolic disease where the probability is low. In addition, it is used in the diagnosis of the blood disorder disseminated intravascular coagulation.…”

Predictors of treatment failure and clinical stability in patients with community acquired pneumonia

“…An elevated D Dimer level may be a non-specific finding in clinical practice (96). That said, D Dimer levels reflect the pathological role coagulation and fibrinolysis play in development acute lung injury.…”