Predictive value of compression ultrasonography for deep vein thrombosis in symptomatic outpatients: clinical implications of the site of vein noncompressibility.

BACKGROUND: Compression ultrasonography has a high negative predictive value for deep vein thrombosis in symptomatic outpatients. Limited data are available on factors influencing positive predictive value. The objective of this study was to evaluate the positive predictive value of compression ultrasonography according to the anatomic site of vein noncompressibility. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of 756 consecutive outpatients with suspected first-episode deep vein thrombosis. Compression ultrasonography was performed at the initial visit: results were abnormal if a noncompressible segment was identified or normal if all segments were fully compressible. Venography was performed in patients with abnormal compression ultrasonography results. Positive predictive value was determined according to the site of noncompressibility: common femoral vein only, popliteal vein only, or both sites. Venography was the reference standard for the presence of deep vein thrombosis. RESULTS: Positive predictive value was 16.7% (95% confidence interval, 0.4%-64.1%) for noncompressibility isolated to the common femoral vein compared with 91.3% (95% confidence interval, 72.0%-98.9%) for the popliteal vein only and 94.4% (95% confidence interval, 72.7%-99.9%) for both sites (P<.001). Of 15 patients with isolated noncompressibility of the common femoral vein, 8 (53%) had pelvic neoplasm or abscess compared with 2 (5%) of 42 with noncompressibility of the popliteal vein only and 6 (13%) of 47 with noncompressibility of both sites (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The positive predictive value of noncompressibility isolated to the common femoral vein is too low to be used alone as the diagnostic end point for giving anticoagulant therapy. Noncompressibility isolated to the common femoral vein is a diagnostic marker for pelvic disease.

The clinical validity of normal compression ultrasonography in outpatients suspected of having deep venous thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasonography using vein compression accurately detects proximal deep venous thrombosis in symptomatic outpatients. Repeated testing is required for patients with normal results at presentation, but the optimal management of such patients is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To test the safety of withholding anticoagulation in outpatients suspected of having first-episode deep venous thrombosis who have normal results on simplified compression ultrasonography at presentation and on a single repeated test done 5 to 7 days later. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Noninvasive vascular laboratories at a university teaching hospital and a Veterans Administration medical center. PATIENTS: 405 consecutive outpatients suspected of having first-episode deep venous thrombosis. INTERVENTION: Ultrasonography was performed at presentation. The common femoral and popliteal veins were assessed for compressibility. If the result was normal, anti-coagulation was withheld and testing was repeated 5 to 7 days later. Anticoagulation was withheld from all patients whose results remained normal according to compression ultrasonography, regardless of their symptoms. The safety of this approach was tested by follow-up lasting 3 months. MEASUREMENTS: Objective testing was done during follow-up in all patients with symptoms or signs of venous thromboembolism. The outcome measure was symptomatic venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism during follow-up, confirmed by objective testing. RESULTS: Ultrasonography had normal results in 335 patients (83%) and abnormal results in 70 (17%). None of the patients with normal results died of pulmonary embolism. Venous thromboembolism occurred during follow-up in 2 patients with normal ultrasonographic results (0.6% [95% CI, 0.07% to 2.14%]) and in 4 patients with abnormal results (5.7% [CI, 1.58% to 13.99%]) (P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: It is safe to withhold anticoagulation in outpatients suspected of having first-episode deep venous thrombosis if results of simplified compression ultrasonography are normal at presentation and on a single repeated test done 5 to 7 days later.

Pseudotumor cerebri. A complication of catheter-induced subclavian vein thrombosis.

Pseudotumor cerebri is frequently the only clinical clue to the presence of cerebral venous thrombosis, a potentially devastating condition. We report a case of pseudotumor cerebri associated with thrombosed dural venous sinuses caused by propagation of a catheter-related subclavian vein thrombus. The findings and clinical course in this case alert us to a complication of central venous catheter use that responds well to treatment if recognized early.

Evaluating chest pain. The patient's presentation style alters the physician's diagnostic approach.

BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction rules rely largely on objective data to estimate coronary artery disease (CAD) likelihood. However, characterization of chest pain, which is central to such prediction rules, depends in part on a physician's subjective judgments. We performed a clinical trial to assess the influence of the patient's presentation style on the physician's approach to evaluating chest pain. METHODS: Forty-four internists were randomized to one of three treatment groups. Two groups viewed videotapes of the same actress performing the role of a patient in a scripted physician-patient interview in two distinct styles: one group saw a "histrionic" characterization, the other a "businesslike" portrayal. The interviewer was not seen or heard by the subjects; they saw only words on the screen. The third group read a verbatim transcript of the interview. After their initial CAD-likelihood estimates and impressions of probable cause for the patient's symptoms, which were based on history only, the participants in all three groups were given the same laboratory data and a second CAD-likelihood estimate was made. Finally, recommendations for further workup were elicited. RESULTS: Initial diagnostic impressions differed dramatically: a cardiac cause was suspected by 50% of physicians viewing the businesslike portrayal but by only 13% of those viewing the histrionic portrayal. Likewise, those viewing the histrionic and businesslike videos provided different CAD-likelihood estimates initially (10% vs 20%). However, after the patient's laboratory data were revealed, the difference in CAD-likelihood estimates was no longer significant. Despite their making a similar risk appraisal after receiving all of the data, internists viewing the histrionic portrayal were far less likely to pursue a cardiac workup (53% vs 93%). CONCLUSIONS: Although physicians may evaluate patients who have the same history word for word and the same laboratory data and whom they regard as having nearly identical likelihoods of CAD, the physician's ultimate diagnostic approach can be profoundly affected by the patient's presentation style.