Usefulness of a semiquantitative D-dimer test for the exclusion of deep venous thrombosis in outpatients.

PURPOSE: The D-dimer test is used commonly in diagnostic strategies to reduce the need for ultrasonography in patients suspected of having deep venous thrombosis. We studied several clinical and laboratory variables that might limit the accuracy of a semiquantitative D-dimer test. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, 704 outpatients suspected of having deep venous thrombosis underwent a semiquantitative D-dimer test and ultrasonography. The performance of the D-dimer test was calculated in patients using anticoagulants (n =61), patients with previous thrombosis (n =127), and patients with malignancy (n =47), including 39 patients with more than one of these characteristics. The 508 remaining patients were considered to be the reference group. RESULTS: A total of 254 patients (36%) had evidence of deep venous thrombosis. The D-dimer test had a sensitivity of 99% (174/176; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 96% to 100%) and a negative predictive value of 98% (98/100; 95% CI: 93% to 100%) in the reference group. The sensitivity of the D-dimer test in patients using oral anticoagulants was 75% (6/8; 95% CI: 35% to 97%; P =0.01 compared with the reference group). Test sensitivity was 96% (51/53; 95% CI: 87% to 100%) in patients with previous thrombosis, and 100% (29/29; 95% CI: 88% to 100%) in patients with cancer. However, 553 (79%) of all patients, including 43 of the cancer patients (91%), had an abnormal D-dimer test. CONCLUSION: The semiquantitative D-dimer test in this study has a high sensitivity and negative predictive value in the exclusion of deep venous thrombosis, except perhaps among patients using oral anticoagulants. D-dimer tests in patients with cancer and in patients over 70 years old may not be worthwhile, because the tests are usually positive.

Low molecular weight heparin (dalteparin) is equally effective as unfractionated heparin in reducing coagulation activity and perfusion abnormalities during the early treatment of pulmonary embolism.

Little is known about the differences between unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with regard to their effects on coagulation activity during treatment for pulmonary embolism. The objective of this study was to compare UFH and LMWH (dalteparin) in the early treatment of pulmonary embolism in terms of control of coagulation markers and perfusion abnormalities. Thirty-seven patients with acute pulmonary embolism were randomized to receive intravenous UFH or subcutaneous dalteparin, each accompanied by acenocoumarol. Daily blood samples were obtained for the measurement of thrombin generation (fragments 1 and 2 [F1+2], thrombin-antithrombin (TAT) complexes and fibrin monomers [FMs]) and fibrinolysis (d-dimer concentrations and clot-lysis times). Ventilation-perfusion scintigraphies were performed, and with the data they yielded, percentage of vascular obstruction scores (PVOs) were calculated on days 0 and 5. The international normalized ratio was within the therapeutic range in both groups on day 3. F1+2 and TAT complexes rapidly normalized, without differences between the groups (P =.5 and.4, respectively). FM levels did not decrease and, in fact, showed an increase in the UFH group from day 3 on (P <.05 between groups). d-Dimer levels decreased over time, with no differences between groups (P =.6). Clot-lysis times were shorter in the UFH group (P <.05). PVOs on days 0 and 5 were not different (P =.5 and.8, respectively), but the decrease in PVOs over time was greater in the dalteparin group (P =.04). These results show that dalteparin is at least as effective as UFH in reducing coagulation activity and perfusion abnormalities in the early treatment of pulmonary embolism.