Exclusion of venous thromboembolism: evaluation of D-Dimer PLUS for the quantitative determination of D-dimer

The objective of this study was to evaluate if D-Dimer PLUS (Dade Behring, USA), a rapid fully automated assay, could be used as an initial screening test in the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Samples from 274 consecutive symptomatic patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (n=229; 79% outpatients, 21% inpatients), deep venous thrombosis (n=37; 84% outpatients, 16% inpatients) or suspected for both complications (n=8) were tested with this D-dimer assay with a Sysmex CA-1500 Coagulation Analyzer. Clinical probability for pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep venous thrombosis (DVT) was staged according to a pretest risk score proposed by Wells. Final diagnosis of PE and/or DVT was established by spiral-computed tomography of the pulmonary arteries or compression ultrasonography, respectively. PE was diagnosed in 13.5% of the patients, whereas DVT was confirmed in 17.7% of the patients. The optimal cut-off value for exclusion of venous thromboembolism was 130 mug/l, and sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value (NPV) were 95.0% (95% CI: 92.4-97.6), 30.4% (95% CI: 25.0-35.8) and 97.2% (95% CI: 95.2-99.2), respectively. In fact, two patient with PE were missed using D-Dimer PLUS; both cases were outpatients. In conclusion, this assay appears to be safe when implemented in an algorithm based on clinical assessment, D-dimer concentration, and radiological diagnostic techniques to stratify the risk for PE or DVT. However, higher sensitivities and negative predictive values were claimed in the scarce published reports for the D-Dimer PLUS assay than found in this study.     

Multicenter evaluation of a new quantitative highly sensitive D-dimer assay, the Hemosil® D-dimer HS 500, in patients with clinically suspected venous thromboembolism

Introduction

D-dimer testing is widely used in conjunction with clinical pretest probability (PTP) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) exclusion. We report on a multicenter evaluation of a new, automated, latex enhanced turbidimetric immunoassay [HemosIL® D-Dimer HS 500, Instrumentation Laboratory (IL)].

Materials and Methods

747 consecutive outpatients with suspected proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT, n = 401) or pulmonary embolism (PE, n = 346) were evaluated at four university hospitals in a management study with a 3 month follow-up. Samples were tested at each center using the new D-dimer assay on an automated coagulation analyzer [ACL TOP (IL)], with clinical cut-off for VTE at 500 ng/mL (FEU).

Results

The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) were 100% for all PTP subgroups (no false negative results); for both sensitivity and NPV the lower limit of the 95% CI in patients with moderate/low PTP was higher than 95%. The overall specificity was 45.1% (95%CI: 41.1-49.3%). Higher specificity value was recorded in the low PTP subgroup [49.2% (95%CI: 41.7-56.7)]. No significant differences were found between patients suspected of having DVT or PE; sensitivity and NPV were 100%. The reproducibility of the assay was good, being the total CVs% less than 10% for D-dimer concentration near the clinical cut-off.

Conclusions

The new, highly sensitive D-dimer assay proved to be accurate when used for VTE diagnostic work-up in outpatients. Based on 100% sensitivity and NPV and lower limit of the 95% CI higher than 95%, the assay can be used as a stand-alone test in patients with non high PTP.     

D-dimer and residual vein obstruction as risk factors for recurrence during and after anticoagulation withdrawal in patients with a first episode of provoked deep-vein thrombosis

D-dimer and residual venous obstruction (RVO) have been separately shown to be risk factors for recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) after a first episode of unprovoked proximal deep-vein thrombosis (DVT). It was the objective of this study to assess the predictive value of D-dimer and residual vein obstruction (RVO), alone and in combination, for recurrence after provoked DVT of the lower limbs. A total of 296 consecutive patients with a first episode of symptomatic provoked proximal DVT were evaluated at a university hospital in Bologna, Italy. On the day of anticoagulation withdrawal (T0), RVO was determined by compression ultrasonography. D-dimer levels (cut-off: 500 ng/ml) were measured at T0 and after 30 ±10 days (T1). The main outcome was recurrent VTE during a two-year follow-up. D-dimer was abnormal in 11.6% (32/276) and 31% (85/276) of subjects at T0 and at T1, respectively. RVO was present in 44.8% (132/294) of patients. Recurrence rate was 5.1% (15/296; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3-8%; 3% patient-years; 95% CI: 2-5 %). An abnormal D-dimer either at T0 or at T1 was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence of 4.2 (95% CI:1.2-14.2; p=0.02) and 3.8 (95%CI: 1.2-12.1; p=0.02), respectively, when compared with normal D-dimer. The HR for recurrence associated with RVO was not significant, and RVO did not increase the recurrence risk associated with an abnormal D-dimer either at T0 or T1. In conclusion, an abnormal D-dimer during vitamin K antagonist (VKA) treatment or at one month after VKA withdrawal is a risk factor for recurrence in patients with provoked DVT, while RVO at the time of anticoagulation withdrawal is not.     

The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with unprovoked symptomatic deep vein thrombosis and asymptomatic pulmonary embolism

Patients with a first episode of symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) have a higher risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) than patients with a first episode of proximal lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Patients with symptomatic DVT and silent PE may have a different risk of VTE recurrence than patients that have symptomatic DVT without PE. Therefore, it was the aim of this prospective cohort study to compare the risk of recurrent symptomatic VTE in patients with proximal lower extremity DVT and silent PE to the risk in patients that only have proximal lower extremity DVT. Ninety-one consecutive outpatients presenting to the emergency department of a university hospital subsequently hospitalised with a first episode of unprovoked symptomatic proximal lower extremity DVT, and without new pulmonary symptoms were included. Standard initial treatment consisted of intravenous unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin for 5-7 days, overlapped with oral vitamin-K antagonist therapy, with long-term oral vitamin-K antagonist therapy (goal INR 2.5 [2.0-3.0]). Study endpoints were: symptomatic recurrent DVT, new PE, and recurrent PE, evaluated by standard objective testing. At enrollment, 28 of 91 (31%) patients with DVT had silent PE. In the patients with DVT and silent PE, there were 3 VTE recurrences during 20 person-years of follow-up, while there were no VTE recurrences during 61 person-years of follow- up in the patients with isolated DVT. The Kaplan-Meier estimated VTE recurrence rate at 1 year after the diagnosis of DVT was 11% (95% CI: 2-28%) for patients with symptomatic DVT and silent PE, compared to 0% in patients with isolated symptomatic DVT (p=0.0045). In patients with a first episode of unprovoked symptomatic acute proximal lower extremity DVT, the risk of recurrent VTE was significantly higher in those with silent PE compared to those without PE.     

Preliminary evaluation of two new rapid immunoturbidimetric D-dimer assays in patients with clinically suspected venous thromboembolism (VTE)

The practical utility and diagnostic accuracy of two new rapid, automated and quantitative immunoturbidimetric D-dimer methods have been evaluated in a population of 123 randomly selected patients with suspected VTE. The STA Liatest D-dimer and MDA D-dimer methods are based on the photo-optical measurement of the rate of agglutination of antibody-coated latex particles. The VIDAS D-dimer automated Elisa was used as the reference method. Diagnosis was confirmed in 51 patients (29 PE, 19 DVT, 3 DVT+PE). The immunoturbidimetric methods compared favorably with the VIDAS Elisa as judged from the correlation coefficients of linear regression lines (r = 0.82, MDA vs VIDAS; r = 0.75, STA vs VIDAS) and areas under the curve of ROC plots (VIDAS 0.83; STA 0.83; MDA 0.81). At a discriminant value of 500 ng/mL, all three D-dimer assays showed high sensitivity (96-98%), high NPV (93-97%) and moderate specificity (39-42%). Reproducibility of results around the cut-off is an important aspect of the diagnostic utility of D-dimer assays. CV's of duplicate determinations in this critical zone showed average values of 5.4% and 17.0% for MDA and STA, respectively. These data demonstrate that such rapid and automated latex-based methods for the quantitative measurement of D-dimer hold promise as reliable and cost-efficient approaches for the exclusion of VTE. Prospective patient management studies will be required to confirm this.     

D-dimer levels in combination with residual venous obstruction and the risk of recurrence after anticoagulation withdrawal for a first idiopathic deep vein thrombosis

We assessed the predictive value of D-dimer levels in combination with residual venous obstruction (RVO) for recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in a prospective cohort of outpatients after oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) suspension for a first episode of idiopathic proximal deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs during a 2-year follow-up. Patients (n=400) were enrolled on the day of OAT suspension when RVO was determined by compression ultrasonography (present in 48.6% of patients). D-dimer (cut-off value: 500 ng/mL) was measured 30+/-10 days afterwards (abnormal in 56.4% of patients). The overall recurrence rate was 16.7% (67/400; 95% confidence intervals - CI -: 13-21 %). The multivariate hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence was 3.32 (95% CI: 1.78-6.75; p<0.0001) for abnormal D-dimer compared to normal D-dimer and 1.2 (95% CI:0.72-2.07; p>0.05) for RVO compared to absent RVO. The recurrence rate was 5.7% (95% CI:2-13%) and 10.4% (95% CI:6-18%), respectively, for normal D-dimer either without or with RVO, 22.9% (95% CI: 14-33%) and 25.9% (95% CI: 18-35%), respectively, for abnormal D-dimer, either without or with RVO. When compared with normal D-dimer without RVO, the multivariate HR for recurrence was similar for abnormal D-dimer either with RVO (4.76 - 95% CI:1.78-12.8) or without RVO (4.3-95%:1.56-11.88). Abnormal D-dimer at one month after OAT withdrawal is an independent risk factor for recurrent VTE, while RVO at the time of OAT withdrawal, either with normal or abnormal D-dimer after one month, does not influence the risk of recurrence.     

D-dimer testing in the diagnosis of acute venous thromboembolism

Patients with acute VTE require clinical assessment and objective testing to be accurately diagnosed. Almost all patients with acute VTE have an elevated D-dimer level. An elevated D-dimer is associated with many illnesses, and therefore, is not specific for VTE. D-dimer tests can have a high sensitivity, however, which is useful because a normal test excludes the diagnosis of VTE. D-dimer testing is most appropriate in the assessment of outpatients because the prevalence of disease and the likelihood of comorbid conditions are lower than in inpatient populations, making a test of exclusion particularly valuable. Accuracy studies using conventional ELISA assays have confirmed that a test with a high sensitivity can be used to exclude a diagnosis of VTE, but conventional ELISA testing is not practical. Studies of more practical D-dimer testing indicate that, for patients with suspected DVT or PE, the need for serial testing or further investigation can be reduced if normal results are obtained using assays with a high sensitivity. There are, however, many sources of variation in the test characteristics of D-dimer assays. Therefore there is no reassurance that results from one manufacturer's test are applicable to other tests and different investigators may obtain varied results when using the same manufacturer's product. In addition, the results of D-dimer accuracy studies lack generalizability. This lack of generalizability has led to the recommendation that clinicians await the results of management studies before adopting the routine use of D-dimer assays in the diagnosis of VTE. Further, it may be reasonable to perform an accuracy study when planning to adopt a specific D-dimer assay from a published management trial, to be confident of its characteristics can be reproduced. In the management of patients with suspected DVT, rapid ELISA tests show promise as a practical D-dimer test, in that they have a sensitivity similar to that of the conventional ELISA assay. Two management studies have recently confirmed that a normal D-dimer result (using the SimpliRED whole-blood assay or the Instant IA rapid ELISA) in combination with a noninvasive test or a clinical model can reliably exclude DVT in outpatients. Use of a clinical model can reduce the need for VU, and the combination of a clinical model and D-dimer testing could further reduce the number of VU procedures required. As noted by Wells et al, who recently published a clinical model, however, a normal D-dimer result was most accurate in the patients with a low pretest likelihood (NPV = 99.5%) and least accurate in patients with a high pretest likelihood (NPV = 85.7%) Patients with a low pretest likelihood and a normal D-dimer are the largest proportion of outpatients referred for testing, and considerable resources may be saved if additional management studies confirm the usefulness of D-dimer testing in such patients. In patients with suspected PE, there is a lack of published management trials despite a number of accuracy studies indicating that D-dimer testing may be useful as a method of PE diagnosis exclusion. Recent results, however, from an accuracy study of patients with suspected PE who had D-dimer testing complement the findings of Wells et al in patients with suspected DVT. Using a standardized clinical model of PE in combination with a SimpliRED D-dimer assay, Ginsberg and colleagues found that the combination of a low pretest likelihood and a normal D-dimer had a negative predictive value of 99%, whereas the negative predictive value was only 78% in patients with a high pretest likelihood and a normal D-dimer. Similar to the findings in DVT, these results indicate that D-dimer testing is most useful in patients with a low pretest likelihood for PE and raise the possibility that such patients may not require lung scans. This finding is currently being evaluated in a prospective management trial.     

Analytical and clinical validation of a new point-of-care testing system for determination of D-Dimer in human blood

D-Dimer testing is used for exclusion of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). AQT90 FLEX D-Dimer (AQT D-Dimer) is a novel time-resolved fluorescence based point-of-care test for quantification of D-Dimer in whole blood or plasma. Presently we have determined the analytical and clinical performance of AQT D-Dimer and compared it with four routine D-Dimer assays.The within-run CV of AQT D-Dimer was 3.8-7.2% and the between-run CV was 5.7- 9.7%. Excellent agreement was found between the D-Dimer concentrations recorded in citrate-, heparin- and EDTA stabilised blood. The plasma concentration of D-Dimer was determined with AQT D-Dimer, AxSYM, Biopool Auto-Dimer, STA-Liatest and Vidas New in 170 consecutive patients suspected for DVT. Phlebograms were positive in 64 patients (22 distal, 42 proximal). ROC-curves (ROC), the negative and positive predictive values (NPV, PPV), the sensitivity and specificity of the tests were compared. The area under ROC was comparable for all tests. NPV for all DVT was 87-88%, the sensitivity was 88-92% and the PPV was 45-55%. For proximal DVT the NPV and sensitivity were 100% for all tests, whereas the PPV was 37-48%. For distal DVT we obtained a NPV of 87-88%. The sensitivity was 64-77%, the PPV was 19-24% whereas a specificity of 32-58% was observed.The AQT D-Dimer demonstrates excellent analytical and diagnostic performance. The test is rapidly performed and the measuring range of the assay is wide. The NPV, PPV, specificity, sensitivity and AUC of AQT D-Dimer for both proximal and distal DVT are comparable to routine D-Dimer assays.     

Diagnostic value of the Nycocard, Nycomed D-dimer assay for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a retrospective study

The relatively new D-dimer assay from Nycomed Pharma (Nycocard), which has shown both high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in earlier studies, was re-evaluated retrospectively. The diagnostic value of the D-dimer assay for DVT was evaluated with contrast venography as reference. The diagnostic value of the D-dimer assay for PE was evaluated with pulmonary scintigraphy as reference. D-dimer tests were examined from 54 consecutive patients. The D-dimer assay was found to have a sensitivity and specificity of 50% and 58%, respectively, for the diagnosis of DVT, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 55% and 54%, respectively. Using reference diagnostic results of high probability and low probability for the diagnosis of PE, the D-dimer test sensitivity and specificity was found to be 40% and 94%, respectively (PPV: 86%, NPV: 64%). The diagnostic value of the Nycocard(R) assay appears to be very limited for the diagnosis of DVT and PE. This retrospective study suggests that it is unsuitable as a screening method. Further re-evaluation of D-dimer assays is recommended prior to routine clinical use.     

Appropriateness of diagnostic strategies for evaluating suspected venous thromboembolism

It was the objective of this study to determine the proportion of patients who undergo an appropriate diagnostic work-up following a D-dimer test performed to evaluate suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We performed a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary care hospital. We included patients if they underwent D-dimer testing between 2002 and 2005, if the D-dimer was performed for evaluation of VTE, and if the D-dimer test was successful. We classified: the patients' clinical probability of DVT or PE according to the Wells models, the imaging results, and the appropriateness of the testing algorithm. Of 1,000 randomly selected patients, 863 met our study criteria. Seven hundred nineteen patients (83%) had testing during an emergency department visit, while 144 were tested as inpatients (17%). Physicians performed the D-dimer test to evaluate DVT and PE in 238 (28%) and 625 (72%) patients, respectively. Overall, the testing strategy was appropriate in 69% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 66%-72%) of cases. The testing strategy was more likely to be appropriate for emergency department versus inpatients (75% vs. 39%, p < 0.05) and for DVT versus PE patients (84% vs. 63%, p < 0.05). Of all in-appropriately tested patients, under-utilization of diagnostic imaging was more common than over-utilization (90% vs. 10%, p < 0.05). VTE was confirmed in 37 of 138 'DVT patients' and 35 of 625 'PE patients' (16% [95% CI: 11%-21%] and 6% [95% CI: 4%-8%], respectively). In conclusion, physicians often fail to use diagnostic testing strategies for VTE correctly following a D-dimer test.     

Predicting recurrences or major bleeding in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism. Findings from the RIETE Registry

Cancer patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) have an increased incidence of recurrences and bleeding complications while on anticoagulant therapy. Methods RIETE is an ongoing registry of consecutive patients with acute VTE. We tried to identify which cancer patients are at a higher risk for recurrent pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or major bleeding. Up to May 2007, 3,805 cancer patients had been enrolled in RIETE. During the first three months of follow-up after the acute, index VTE event, 90 (2.4%) patients developed recurrent PE, 100 (2.6%) recurrent DVT, 156 (4.1%) had major bleeding. Forty patients (44%) died of the recurrent PE,46 (29%) of bleeding. On multivariate analysis, patients aged <65 years (odds ratio [OR]: 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9-4.9), with PE at entry (OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2-3.1), or with <3 months from cancer diagnosis to VTE (OR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.2-3.2) had an increased incidence of recurrent PE. Those aged <65 years (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.0-2.4) or with <3 months from cancer diagnosis (OR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.5-3.6) had an increased incidence of recurrent DVT. Finally, patients with immobility (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.2-2.7), metastases (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1-2.3), recent bleeding (OR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.1-5.1), or with creatinine clearance <30 ml/min (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.5-3.4), had an increased incidence of major bleeding. With some variables available at entry we may identify those cancer patients withVTE at a higher risk for recurrences or major bleeding.     

Safety of excluding acute pulmonary embolism based on an unlikely clinical probability by the Wells rule and normal D-dimer concentration: A meta-analysis

Introduction

The Wells clinical decision rule (CDR) and D-dimer tests can be used to exclude pulmonary embolism (PE). We performed a meta-analysis to determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of an “unlikely” CDR (≤ 4 points) combined with a normal D-dimer test and the safety of withholding anti-coagulants based on these criteria.

Methods

Prospective studies that withheld anti-coagulant treatment from patients with clinically suspected PE and an “unlikely” CDR in combination with a normal D-dimer concentration without performing further tests were searched for in Medline, Cochrane and Embase. Primary endpoints were the recurrence rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and PE-related mortality during 3-months follow-up.

Results

Four studies including 1660 consecutive patients were identified. The pooled incidence of VTE after initial exclusion of acute PE based on an “unlikely” CDR and normal D-dimer was 0.34% (95%CI 0.036-0.96%), resulting in a NPV of 99.7% (95%CI: 99.0-99.9%, random effects-model). The risk for PE related mortality was very low: 1/1660 patients had fatal PE (0.06%, 95%CI 0.0017-0.46%).

Conclusion

Acute PE can be safely excluded in patients with clinically suspected acute PE who have an “unlikely” probability and a negative D-dimer test and anticoagulant treatment can be withheld. There is no need for additional radiological tests in these patients to rule out PE.     

Evaluation of plasma D-dimer in the diagnosis and in the course of fibrinolytic therapy of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

Blood samples were obtained from patients with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) after angiographic confirmation as well as during fibrinolytic therapy with streptokinase. Plasma cross-linked fibrin degradation products were measured by a quantitative enzyme-linked immunoassay that recognizes the D-Dimer epitope. 24 patients with PE showed elevated D-Dimer levels (median; 25%-, 75%-quartile) (3,250 ng/ml; 1,270 ng/ml, 6,940 ng/ml) as well as 38 patients presenting with DVT (2,330 ng/ml; 1,760 ng/ml, 3,980 ng/ml). The sensitivity for the diagnosis of PE was 92%, for diagnosis of DVT 89% resp. 100%, depending on the cut-off limit. The D-Dimer level showed a correlation (r = 0.64) to the angiographically documented severity of PE quantified by the Miller's score, in contrast to DVT, where no such correlation could be found. During fibrinolytic therapy median levels rose from 3,020 ng/ml to 63,000 ng/ml within 8 hours and then fell within 6 days to 2,930 ng/ml. 10 patients with PE showed a good correlation (r = 0.72) between the reduction of Miller's score within 72 hours and D-Dimer 24 hours after the onset of therapy. In 17 patients with fibrinolytic treatment of DVT no correlation between D-Dimer and clot lysis could be found. These findings indicate that D-Dimer can provide additional information in the diagnostic procedure of suspected PE. During fibrinolytic therapy of PE with streptokinase, D-Dimer could serve as an early prognostic parameter of successful thrombolysis.     

A multicenter evaluation of a new quantitative highly sensitive D-dimer assay for exclusion of venous thromboembolism

D-dimer testing is widely applied for exclusion of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). We report on a multicenter performance evaluation of a new particle-enhanced immunoassay, Innovancetrade mark D-Dimer. Innovance D-Dimer assay was performed in 1,543 frozen samples from outpatients suspected of DVT and/or PE enrolled in three management studies as well as in a routine clinical practice. Samples were assayed on BCS((R))/BCS((R)) XP, BCT((R)) as well as Sysmex((R)) CA-7000, CA-1500 and CA-560 analyzers (cut-off on all analyzers: 0.5 mg/l). Stratus((R)) CS D-Dimer and Vidas((R)) D-Dimer Exclusion were used for comparison. The precision study indicated total coefficients of variation ranging from 2.1% to 8.4% depending on the analyzer and on the sample. Sensitivity and negative predictive values were above 99% and their lower 95% confidence interval were equal or above 97.4% and 98.6%, respectively. Specificity ranged from 38.2% to 40.4% and the respective lower 95% confidence intervals from 35.5% to 37.7%. Area under the curve was 0.90 for all assay systems except for Innovance D-Dimer with BCT (0.89). Two samples from patients with distal DVT tested negative with all assay systems. One patient with high pre-test clinical probability and proximal DVT tested negative with Vidas D-Dimer Exclusion. Our data indicate that the performances of Innovance D-Dimer, regardless of the analyzer, are similar to the reference methods, and that this assay can be used for the exclusion of venous thromboembolic disease.     

A rapid and quantitative D-Dimer assay in whole blood and plasma on the point-of-care PATHFAST analyzer

The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy indices of the new rapid and quantitative PATHFAST D-Dimer assay in patients with clinically suspected deep-vein thrombosis (DVT). Eighty two consecutive patients (34% DVT, 66% non-DVT) with suspected DVT of a lower limb were tested with the D-Dimer assay with a PATHFAST analyzer. The diagnostic value of the PATHFAST D-Dimer assay (which is based on the principle of a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay) for DVT was evaluated with pre-test clinical probability, compression ultrasonography (CUS). Furthermore, each patient underwent contrast venography and computed tomography, if necessary. The sensitivity and specificity of the D-Dimer assay using 0.570 mug/mL FEU as a clinical cut-off value was found to be 100% and 63.2%, respectively, for the diagnosis of DVT, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 66.7% and 100%, respectively. The correlation between the results of PATHFAST D-Dimer and VIDAS D-Dimer was acceptable (y=1.134x+0.003, r=0.902). The test reproducibility was good (CV%: from 4.0% to 5.0% for plasma and from 7.1% to 7.5% for whole blood) and the total imprecision was very good (CV%: 3.6-5.7%). Whole blood as well as plasma can be used as samples in this assay (y=1.013x-0.010, r=0.971 for heparinized specimens; y=1.068x+0.003, r=0.989 for citrated specimens). Because of its high sensitivity and NPV PATHFAST D-Dimer assay can be useful for the rapid rule out of DVT in patients admitted with suspected thrombosis.     

Incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome in patients with previous pulmonary embolism. A retrospective cohort study

There is little information available about the true incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of PTS in patients with previous pulmonary embolism without concomitant ultrasonographically-detectable deep vein thrombosis (DVT). A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary care centre, Cosenza, Italy. Forty-seven consecutive patients with proved PE without DVT within the previous 2 to 6 years, 45 patients with previous DVT in the same years, and 45 patients with diseases unrelated to venous thromboembolism (VTE) underwent a blind assessment for PTS using a clinical score. Two of 47 (4.2%, 95%CI: 0.01-9.9) patients with PE, 2 of 45 (4.4%, 95%CI: 0.01-10.4) patients with diseases unrelated to VTE, and 23 of 45 (53.3%, 95%CI: 38.7-67.9) patients with DVT showed signs and symptoms of PTS. The difference between the first two groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.7). In conclusion, the incidence of PTS after pulmonary embolism without DVT is low, and no different from that of patients without previous VTE.     

Sensitive and quantitative, 10-min immunofluorometric assay for D-Dimer in whole blood

INTRODUCTION: Normal concentrations of D-Dimer can be used to exclude venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, methods for sensitive and quantitative D-Dimer measurements at the point-of-care (POC) are still limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a 10-min, non-competitive immunofluorometric assay for D-Dimer in citrated whole blood and plasma using pre-dispensed reagents dried in single assay wells. The simple, automated assay procedure comprises a 1:50 sample dilution, one-step incubation, washing, and time-resolved fluorometric measurement directly from the wet well surface. RESULTS: The limits of detection (background + 3SD) and quantification (CV <15%) were 0.05 and 0.2 mg/L D-Dimer, respectively, and the assay was linear up to 400 mg/L. Correlations to Roche TinaQuant (r=0.726, n=200) and Biopool Auto.Dimer (r=0.190, n=149) were carried out using citrated plasma. Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and negative (NPV) and positive (PPV) predictive values were 98.7%, 64.4%, 99.1% and 55.1%, and 92.2%, 81.0%, 95.9% and 68.3%, respectively, using cut-off values of 0.6 and 1.0 mg/L, respectively, in outpatients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE) (n=77) compared with outpatients with various other diseases (n=174). The within- and between-run CVs near the cut-off values were < or =10% in both whole blood and plasma. The 95th percentile upper range in apparently healthy individuals was 0.68 mg/L of whole blood (n=101). CONCLUSIONS: The high sensitivity and NPV suggest that the rapid immunofluorometric assay could be valuable for rapid exclusion of VTE in outpatients. With appropriate cut-offs, the assay could potentially be used as a stand-alone test or combined with clinical probability assessment, but further studies are required.     

Comparison of the clinical usefulness of two quantitative D-Dimer tests in patients with a low clinical probability of pulmonary embolism

Background

Quantitative D-Dimer tests are established methods in the non-invasive diagnostic management to rule out venous thromboembolism (VTE). The diagnostic performance and the clinical efficiency different D-Dimer assays in the exclusion of pulmonary embolism (PE) have not yet been compared in a clinical outcome study.

Objective

Evaluation of the efficiency and safety of excluding the diagnosis of PE with two different quantitative D-Dimer assays in consecutive patients with clinically suspected PE.

Patients and Methods

We studied the VTE-failure rate of 2206 consecutive patients with an unlikely clinical probability in whom VIDAS or Tinaquant D-Dimer tests were performed.

Results

The prevalence of PE in 1238 patients whose D-Dimer level was analyzed with Tinaquant assay was 11%. The VIDAS assay group consisted of 968 patients with a PE prevalence of 13%. The VIDAS assay had a sensitivity of 99.2% (95%CI; 96- > 99.9%), the Tinaquant assay of 97.3% (95%CI; 93 -99%). The negative predictive value (NPV) in the Tinaquant assay group was 99.4% (95%CI 98-99.8%) in comparison to 99.7% (95%CI 99-> 99.9%) in the VIDAS assay group. During 3 month of follow-up, there were no fatal cases of PE among patients with normal D-Dimer and unlikely clinical probability in both D-Dimer assay groups. In addition, the test efficiency of Tinaquant assay was significantly higher in comparison to VIDAS assay (52% vs 42%, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Both Tinaquant and VIDAS D-Dimer tests perform equally well in combination with an unlikely clinical probability in excluding PE. The Tinaquant test was shown to be more efficient.     

Validation of a new D-dimer microparticle enzyme immunoassay (AxSYM D-Dimer) in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE)

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate a new automated assay for D-dimer testing (AxSYM D-Dimer) based on microparticle enzyme-immunoassay technology by comparing it with three well established D-dimer assays. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The performance of the new assay was evaluated in 280 plasma samples that were collected prospectively from out-patients included in a management study evaluating a decision based algorithm. RESULTS: 58/280 patients (21%) had PE diagnosed by CT. Median values of AxSYM D-dimer in patients with PE were 3689 ng/mL (range 775-9000). Comparison analysis displayed excellent agreement with VIDAS (kappa=0.84) and Asserachrom (kappa=0.81) D-dimer assays. A strong correlation was found between AxSYM and the VIDAS (r=0.96) and Asserachrom (r=0.89) D-dimer assays. The highest cut-off value for AxSYM that yielded a sensitivity of 100% was 765 ng/mL with a specificity of 50%. At the cut-off level <500 ng/mL, the sensitivity and specificity of AxSYM D-dimer were 100% and 34%; VIDAS 100% and 42%; Asserachrom 100% and 40%; and STALiatest 100% and 37%, respectively. AxSYM D-dimer was negative in 75 patients (33.8%). None of these had PE at the initial work-up or VTE during the 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: AxSYM D-dimer seems to be safe and effective in ruling out PE in out-patients. The cut-off level can be set at 500 to 750 ng/mL, at which the assay displays a performance that is comparable to that of the ELISA based assays. However, further studies are needed to confirm the safety of the assay and to determine the most optimal cut-off level in patients with venous thromboembolism.     

Diagnosis and management of venous thromboembolism: Results of a survey on current clinical practice

Background

The implementation of evidence from clinical studies into daily clinical practice is not a straightforward process. We developed a standardized questionnaire to explore clinical practice patterns in the management of VTE, in particular about the use of pre-clinical probability and D-dimer testing and on the home treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE).

Methods

The standardized questionnaire was sent to all 394 physician members of the Italian Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SISET) by e-mail. The questionnaire contained three groups of questions: about general information, about the diagnostic process for both deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and PE, and about home-therapy of PE.

Results

One hundred and twenty-eight (32.5%) physicians responded the questionnaire. For DVT diagnosis 69 (54.3%) physicians answered that they always use the D-dimer test; 4 (3.1%) do never use it; whereas only 11 (8.7%) take notice of the D-dimer result before visiting the patients; 38 (29.9%) use only clinical judgment to assess pre-clinical probability of disease. For the diagnosis of PE 80 (66.1%) physicians always use the D-dimer test, whereas 3 (2.5%) do never use it; whereas 14 (11.7%) take notice of the D-dimer result before visiting the patients; 50 (41.3%) use only clinical judgment to assess pre-clinical probability. Sixty-six (59.5%) clinicians declared to treat patients with PE at home, when feasible.

Conclusion

The diagnostic approach to VTE among expert physicians appears to be heterogeneous; in particular there is no widespread use of clinical prediction rules. The majority of expert physicians appear to consider the possibility of treating at home patients with PE.