Magnitude of d-dimer matters for diagnosing pulmonary embolus

Shah, Kaushal; Quaas, Joshua; Rolston, Daniel M.; Bansal, Shalu; Bania, Theodore C.; Newman, David H.; Wiener, Dan; Lee, Jarone

doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2013.03.009

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although not optimal, D‐dimer is currently the best parameter (in combination with clinical scoring systems) to predictive PE compared with other parameters previously suggested such as CRP or myeloperoxidase . In contrast to a recent paper , we did not observe an increased presence of PE in patients who had higher D‐dimer levels (Meindert Johannes Crop, unpublished data). Prospective studies are needed to investigate whether it is safe to rely on the height of the D‐dimer level in diagnosing PE.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 88%

Influence of C‐reactive protein levels and age on the value of D‐dimer in diagnosing pulmonary embolism

Crop

Siemes

Berendes

et al. 2013

European J of Haematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 88%

Influence of C‐reactive protein levels and age on the value of D‐dimer in diagnosing pulmonary embolism

Crop

Siemes

Berendes

et al. 2013

European J of Haematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the first study (PE confirmed patients/study population = 134/370), it was reported that the best D-dimer cutoff level for significant PE risk = should be 2.152 mg/L (AUC, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64-0.74; p < 0.05) [11]. In the second study (PE confirmed patients/study population = 48/544), the optimal D-dimer cutoff point for significant PE risk was determined to be 0.9 mg/L (AUC, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.82; p < 0.001) [18]. In the third study (PE confirmed patients/study population = 40/80), the authors have declared a best D-dimer cutoff point for significant PE risk of 0.83 mg/L (AUC, 0.762; 95% CI, 0.653-0.850; p < 0.05) [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meanwhile, compared with previous studies, our study has the largest investigation population (n = 1035) in which the number of PE confirmed patients is 294(28.41%). In the last two studies [18,19], it is limited in terms of both research population and PE confirmed patients. It was also reported that the age is an important factor while evaluating D-dimer levels for PE diagnosis [21,22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The diagnostic value of D-dimer with simplified Geneva score (SGS) pre-test in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE)

Zhuang

et al. 2020

J Cardiothorac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most common cardiovascular syndrome with an average annual incidence rate of 77 per 100,000 population in the worldwide. The diagnose algorithms for suspected PE are generally include clinical scoring assessment and plasma D-dimer evaluation, patients with high risk of PE require computed tomographic pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) detection for confirmation. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, 1035 patients with suspected PE were recruited. All the patients were clinically received simplified Geneva score (SGS) pre-test, determination of plasma D-dimer level, and CTPA detection. All enrolled patients were grouped according to the CTPA results: PE patients and non-PE patients. Then, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were constructed to determine the optimal D-dimer cutoff point value which is based on Yonden's index (YI). Results: 294 (28.4%) patients were confirmed with PE and 741(71.6%) individuals were regarded as non-PE cases by CTPA detection. Using the SGS pre-test, 829 (80.1%) patients were classified PE-unlikely (SGS ≤ 2) and 206 (19.9%) patients were PE-likely (SGS ≥ 3). Patients with D-dimer levels above 1.96 mg/L had a significant risk to suffer from PE (area under curve (AUC), 0.707; 95% CI, 0.678-0.735; p < 0.05). Meanwhile, in patients with SGS ≥ 3, the D-dimer cutoff point value moved to 2.2 mg/L (AUC, 0.644; 95% CI, 0.574-0.709; p < 0.05). Conclusion: D-dimer test in combination with SGS pre-test could improve the accuracy of PE diagnosis. Patients with D-dimer levels over 1.96 mg/L (4 times of the normal level) have a significant risk for PE. In patients with SGS ≥ 3, the D-dimer cutoff point concentration for PE risk moves to the levels of 2.2 mg/L.

show abstract

“…During 2013, the number was also 9 (PubMed search performed on 8/12/2014, too): milligrams per deciliter [5], milligrams per liter [6], micrograms per milliliter [7], micrograms per deciliter [8], micrograms per liter [3], nanograms per milliliter [9], nanograms per deciliter [10], nanograms per liter [11], and picograms per milliliter [12]. Moreover, 1 additional numerical unit appeared in 2014: milligrams per milliliter [13].…”

Section: Let Us Publish D-dimer In Micrograms Per Liter ☆mentioning

confidence: 99%

Let us publish d-dimer in micrograms per liter

Koraćević

2014

The American Journal of Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnitude of d-dimer matters for diagnosing pulmonary embolus

Cited by 16 publications

References 31 publications

Influence of C‐reactive protein levels and age on the value of D‐dimer in diagnosing pulmonary embolism

Influence of C‐reactive protein levels and age on the value of D‐dimer in diagnosing pulmonary embolism

The diagnostic value of D-dimer with simplified Geneva score (SGS) pre-test in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE)

Let us publish d-dimer in micrograms per liter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About