Annals of emergency medicine · 2005
The emergency department utility of Simplify D-dimer to exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with pleuritic chest pain.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hogg Kerstin, Dawson Deborah, Mackway-Jones Kevin
Аннотация
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Pleuritic chest pain is a common presenting complaint in the emergency department (ED) and a symptom of pulmonary embolism. Patients with pleuritic chest pain would benefit from a simple and rapid way of screening for pulmonary embolism. The aim of this study is to assess the utility of Simplify D-dimer as a rule-out tool for pulmonary embolism in ED patients with pleuritic chest pain.
METHODS: This was a prospective diagnostic study in a large city-center ED. Four hundred twenty-five patients with pleuritic chest pain were prospectively recruited between February 2002 and June 2003. Simplify D-dimer testing was performed on each patient in the ED. All patients followed an independent reference standard diagnostic algorithm for pulmonary embolism. Each patient was followed up clinically for 3 months.
RESULTS: The calculated sensitivity of Simplify D-dimer for pulmonary embolism was 81.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 61.4% to 92.7%), and specificity was 74.2% (95% CI 69.6% to 78.4%). The negative predictive value was 98.6% (95% CI 96.6% to 99.6%), positive predictive value 15.0% (95% CI 9.1% to 22.7%), negative likelihood ratio 0.25 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.52) and positive likelihood ratio 3.17 (95% CI 2.30 to 3.97). The study cohort pretest probability was 5.3%. A negative Simplify result reduced the posttest probability to 1.3% (95% CI 0.5% to 3.4%).
CONCLUSION: The Simplify D-dimer is not sufficiently sensitive to exclude the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in all patients presenting to the ED with pleuritic chest pain.
METHODS: This was a prospective diagnostic study in a large city-center ED. Four hundred twenty-five patients with pleuritic chest pain were prospectively recruited between February 2002 and June 2003. Simplify D-dimer testing was performed on each patient in the ED. All patients followed an independent reference standard diagnostic algorithm for pulmonary embolism. Each patient was followed up clinically for 3 months.
RESULTS: The calculated sensitivity of Simplify D-dimer for pulmonary embolism was 81.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 61.4% to 92.7%), and specificity was 74.2% (95% CI 69.6% to 78.4%). The negative predictive value was 98.6% (95% CI 96.6% to 99.6%), positive predictive value 15.0% (95% CI 9.1% to 22.7%), negative likelihood ratio 0.25 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.52) and positive likelihood ratio 3.17 (95% CI 2.30 to 3.97). The study cohort pretest probability was 5.3%. A negative Simplify result reduced the posttest probability to 1.3% (95% CI 0.5% to 3.4%).
CONCLUSION: The Simplify D-dimer is not sufficiently sensitive to exclude the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in all patients presenting to the ED with pleuritic chest pain.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAntifibrinolytic AgentsChest PainCohort StudiesDiagnosis, DifferentialEmergency MedicineFemaleFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation ProductsFollow-Up StudiesHumansLikelihood FunctionsMaleObserver VariationPleurisyProspective StudiesPulmonary EmbolismReference StandardsRisk FactorsSensitivity and Specificity