Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2020
Role of an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff level in the diagnosis algorithm of lower limb deep venous thrombosis in outpatients.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Jimenez-Guiu Xavier, Romera-Villegas Antonio, Huici-Sanchez Malka, Martinez-Rico Carlos, Vila-Coll Ramon
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to analyze the utility of the age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff value in patients with clinically suspected deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in an ambulatory care setting, including distal DVTs.
METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of 606 outpatients older than 18 years presenting with low or moderate clinical suspicion of lower limb DVT (measured by Wells scale). D-dimer levels were obtained, and duplex ultrasound was performed (including femoropopliteal and below-knee veins). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive D-dimer values and when to apply the age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff value (D-dimer threshold = age × 10 μg/L). We split patients older than 50 years into 10-year age groups. We constructed receiver operating characteristic curves of the D-dimer test for each group to find the best threshold (defined as the value of D-dimer that gives more specificity, maintaining the maximum possible sensitivity).
RESULTS: There were 249 men and 357 women with a mean age of 69.3 years; 41 patients were diagnosed with DVT. At a D-dimer threshold of 250 μg/L, sensitivity was 93%, specificity was 8%, positive predictive value was 7%, and negative predictive value was 94%. When the age-adjusted cutoff level was applied, global sensitivity was 76% and specificity 61%; positive predictive value was 12%, and negative predictive value was 97%. False-negative rate was 24%. We split patients older than 50 years into 10-year age groups: 50 to 60 years, 60 to 70 years, 70 to 80 years, and >80 years. The optimum thresholds were, respectively, 526 μg/L, 442.5 μg/L, 475 μg/L, and 549. μg/L.
CONCLUSIONS: In our series, the age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff level is not useful in the diagnostic algorithm of DVT.
METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of 606 outpatients older than 18 years presenting with low or moderate clinical suspicion of lower limb DVT (measured by Wells scale). D-dimer levels were obtained, and duplex ultrasound was performed (including femoropopliteal and below-knee veins). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive D-dimer values and when to apply the age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff value (D-dimer threshold = age × 10 μg/L). We split patients older than 50 years into 10-year age groups. We constructed receiver operating characteristic curves of the D-dimer test for each group to find the best threshold (defined as the value of D-dimer that gives more specificity, maintaining the maximum possible sensitivity).
RESULTS: There were 249 men and 357 women with a mean age of 69.3 years; 41 patients were diagnosed with DVT. At a D-dimer threshold of 250 μg/L, sensitivity was 93%, specificity was 8%, positive predictive value was 7%, and negative predictive value was 94%. When the age-adjusted cutoff level was applied, global sensitivity was 76% and specificity 61%; positive predictive value was 12%, and negative predictive value was 97%. False-negative rate was 24%. We split patients older than 50 years into 10-year age groups: 50 to 60 years, 60 to 70 years, 70 to 80 years, and >80 years. The optimum thresholds were, respectively, 526 μg/L, 442.5 μg/L, 475 μg/L, and 549. μg/L.
CONCLUSIONS: In our series, the age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff level is not useful in the diagnostic algorithm of DVT.