Harringa John B, Bracken Rebecca L, Nagle Scott K, Schiebler Mark L, Pulia Michael S, Svenson James E, Repplinger Michael D
BerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 800 University Bay Drive, Suite 310, Mail Code 9123, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Emerg Radiol. 2017 Jun;24(3):273-280. doi: 10.1007/s10140-017-1478-6. Epub 2017 Jan 24.
The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of d-dimer testing to obviate the need for cross-sectional imaging for patients at "non-high risk" for pulmonary embolism (PE).
This is a retrospective study of emergency department patients at an academic medical center who underwent cross-sectional imaging (MRA or CTA) to evaluate for PE from 2008 to 2013. The primary outcome was the NPV of d-dimer testing when used in conjunction with clinical decision instruments (CDIs = Wells', Revised Geneva, and Simplified Revised Geneva Scores). The reference standard for PE status included image test results and a 6-month chart review follow-up for venous thromboembolism as a proxy for false negative imaging. Secondary analyses included ROC curves for each CDI and calculation of PE prevalence in each risk stratum.
Of 459 patients, 41 (8.9%) had PE. None of the 76 patients (16.6%) with negative d-dimer results had PE. Thus, d-dimer testing had 100% sensitivity and NPV, and there were no differences in CDI performance. Similarly, when evaluated independently of d-dimer results, no CDI outperformed the others (areas under the ROC curves ranged 0.53-0.55). There was a significantly higher PE prevalence in the high versus "non-high risk" groups when stratified by the Wells' Score (p = 0.03).
Negative d-dimer testing excluded PE in our retrospective cohort. Each CDI had similar NPVs, whether analyzed in conjunction with or independently of d-dimer results. Our results confirm that PE can be safely excluded in patients with "non-high risk" CDI scores and a negative d-dimer.
本研究旨在评估D-二聚体检测对于无需进行横断面成像的“非高风险”肺栓塞(PE)患者的必要性。
这是一项对某学术医疗中心急诊科患者的回顾性研究,这些患者在2008年至2013年期间接受了横断面成像(MRA或CTA)以评估是否患有PE。主要结局是D-二聚体检测与临床决策工具(CDIs = Wells评分、修订版日内瓦评分和简化修订版日内瓦评分)联合使用时的阴性预测值(NPV)。PE状态的参考标准包括影像检查结果以及对静脉血栓栓塞进行为期6个月的图表回顾随访,以此作为假阴性影像的替代指标。次要分析包括每个CDI的ROC曲线以及各风险分层中PE患病率的计算。
459例患者中,41例(8.9%)患有PE。76例D-二聚体结果为阴性的患者(16.6%)均未患PE。因此,D-二聚体检测的敏感性和NPV均为100%,且CDI的表现无差异。同样,在独立于D-二聚体结果进行评估时,没有一个CDI的表现优于其他CDI(ROC曲线下面积范围为0.53 - 0.55)。根据Wells评分进行分层时,高风险组与“非高风险”组的PE患病率存在显著差异(p = 0.03)。
在我们的回顾性队列中,D-二聚体检测结果为阴性可排除PE。无论与D-二聚体结果联合分析还是独立分析,每个CDI的NPV都相似。我们的结果证实,对于“非高风险”CDI评分且D-二聚体检测结果为阴性的患者,可以安全地排除PE。