Advertisement

The Importance of Clinical Probability Assessment in Interpreting a Normal d-Dimer in Patients With Suspected Pulmonary Embolism

      Background

      The d-dimer test is widely applied in the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). The objective of this study was to investigate how often the d-dimer test fails when clinical probability is not taken into account.

      Methods

      We used data collected in 1,722 consecutive patients with clinically suspected PE to analyze the 3-month venous thromboembolism (VTE) rate in all patients with a normal d-dimer concentration and separately for patients who have a normal d-dimer concentration with an unlikely or likely clinical probability for PE, as assessed by the Wells clinical decision rule.

      Results

      The 3-month VTE rate in all patients with a normal d-dimer concentration (n = 563) was 2.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4 to 3.9%). In the patients with an unlikely probability of PE (n = 477), VTE was confirmed in 1.1% of the patients with a normal d-dimer concentration (95% CI, 0.4 to 2.4%). In those patients with a likely clinical probability of PE (n = 86), VTE was confirmed in 9.3% of the patients with a normal d-dimer concentration (95% CI, 4.8 to 17.3%). The difference in VTE incidence between patients with unlikely and likely clinical probabilities of PE was significant (p < 0.001).

      Conclusions

      Our findings indicate that it is of utmost importance to first examine the patient and assess the clinical probability, after which the d-dimer concentration can be taken into account, in order to prevent physicians from being influenced by a normal d-dimer test result when they evaluate the clinical probability of PE. Patients with a likely clinical probability should undergo further testing, regardless of the d-dimer test outcome.

      Key words

      Abbreviations:

      CDR (clinical decision rule), CI (confidence interval), DVT (deep venous thrombosis), IQR (interquartile range), LMWH (low-molecular-weight heparin), PE (pulmonary embolism), VTE (venous thromboembolism)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic and Personal
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to CHEST
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • van Belle A
        • Buller HR
        • Huisman MV
        • et al.
        Effectiveness of managing suspected pulmonary embolism using an algorithm combining clinical probability, d-dimer testing, and computed tomography.
        JAMA. 2006; 295: 172-179
        • Wells PS
        • Anderson DR
        • Rodger M
        • et al.
        Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside without diagnostic imaging: management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism presenting to the emergency department by using a simple clinical model and d-dimer.
        Ann Intern Med. 2001; 135: 98-107
        • Ten Cate-Hoek AJ
        • Prins MH
        Management studies using a combination of d-dimer test result and clinical probability to rule out venous thromboembolism: a systematic review.
        J Thromb Haemost. 2005; 3: 2465-2470
        • Roy PM
        • Meyer G
        • Vielle B
        • et al.
        Appropriateness of diagnostic management and outcomes of suspected pulmonary embolism.
        Ann Intern Med. 2006; 144: 157-164
        • Kelly J
        • Hunt BJ
        A clinical probability assessment and d-dimer measurement should be the initial step in the investigation of suspected venous thromboembolism.
        Chest. 2003; 124: 1116-1119
        • Righini M
        • Aujesky D
        • Roy PM
        • et al.
        Clinical usefulness of d-dimer depending on clinical probability and cutoff value in outpatients with suspected pulmonary embolism.
        Arch Intern Med. 2004; 164: 2483-2487
        • Wells PS
        • Anderson DR
        • Rodger M
        • et al.
        Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED d-dimer.
        Thromb Haemost. 2000; 83: 416-420
        • Gibson NS
        • Sohne M
        • Kruip MJ
        • et al.
        Further validation and simplification of the Wells clinical decision rule in pulmonary embolism.
        Thromb Haemost. 2008; 99: 229-234
        • Kruip MJ
        • Slob MJ
        • Schijen JH
        • et al.
        Use of a clinical decision rule in combination with d-dimer concentration in diagnostic workup of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a prospective management study.
        Arch Intern Med. 2002; 162: 1631-1635
        • Perrier A
        • Roy PM
        • Aujesky D
        • et al.
        Diagnosing pulmonary embolism in outpatients with clinical assessment, d-dimer measurement, venous ultrasound, and helical computed tomography: a multicenter management study.
        Am J Med. 2004; 116: 291-299
        • Wells PS
        • Ginsberg JS
        • Anderson DR
        • et al.
        Use of a clinical model for safe management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism.
        Ann Intern Med. 1998; 129: 997-1005
        • Ray P
        • Bellick B
        • Birolleau S
        • et al.
        Referent d-dimer enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay testing is of limited value in the exclusion of thromboembolic disease: result of a practical study in an ED.
        Am J Emerg Med. 2006; 24: 313-318
        • Kraaijenhagen RA
        • Wallis J
        • Koopman MM
        • et al.
        Can causes of false-normal d-dimer test [SimpliRED] results be identified?.
        Thromb Res. 2003; 111: 155-158
        • Cogo A
        • Lensing AW
        • Koopman MM
        • et al.
        Compression ultrasonography for diagnostic management of patients with clinically suspected deep vein thrombosis: prospective cohort study.
        BMJ. 1998; 316: 17-20
        • Perrier A
        • Roy PM
        • Sanchez O
        • et al.
        Multidetector-row computed tomography in suspected pulmonary embolism.
        N Engl J Med. 2005; 352: 1760-1768
        • Stein PD
        • Fowler SE
        • Goodman LR
        • et al.
        Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism.
        N Engl J Med. 2006; 354: 2317-2327
        • Righini M
        • Le Gal G
        • Aujesky D
        • et al.
        Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism by multidetector CT alone or combined with venous ultrasonography of the leg: a randomised non-inferiority trial.
        Lancet. 2008; 371: 1343-1352
        • Kruip MJ
        • Leclercq MG
        • van der HC
        • et al.
        Diagnostic strategies for excluding pulmonary embolism in clinical outcome studies: a systematic review.
        Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138: 941-951