We have located links that may give you full text access.
Renal Function-Adjusted D-Dimer Levels in Critically Ill Patients With Suspected Thromboembolism.
Critical Care Medicine 2020 January 8
OBJECTIVES: Diagnosing thromboembolic disease typically includes D-dimer testing and use of clinical scores in patients with low to intermediate pretest probability. However, renal dysfunction is often observed in patients with thromboembolic disease and was previously shown to be associated with increased D-dimer levels. We seek to validate previously suggested estimated glomerular filtration rate-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels. Furthermore, we strive to explore whether the type of renal dysfunction affects estimated glomerular filtration rate-adjusted D-dimer test characteristics.
DESIGN: Single-center retrospective data analysis from electronic healthcare records of all emergency department patients admitted for suspected thromboembolic disease.
SETTING: Tertiary care academic hospital.
SUBJECTS: Exclusion criteria were as follows: age less than 16 years old, patients with active bleeding, and/or incomplete records.
INTERVENTIONS: Test characteristics of previously suggested that estimated glomerular filtration rate-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels (> 333 µg/L [estimated glomerular filtration rate, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m], > 1,306 µg/L [30-60 mL/min/1.73 m], and > 1,663 µg/L [< 30 mL/min/1.73 m]) were validated and compared with the conventional D-dimer cutoff level of 500 µg/L.
MAIN RESULTS: A total of 14,477 patients were included in the final analysis, with 467 patients (3.5%) diagnosed with thromboembolic disease. Renal dysfunction was observed in 1,364 (9.4%) of the total population. When adjusted D-dimer levels were applied, test characteristics remained stable: negative predictive value (> 99%), sensitivity (91.2% vs 93.4%), and specificity (42.7% vs 50.7%) when compared with the conventional D-dimer cutoff level to rule out thromboembolic disease (< 500 µg/L). Comparable characteristics were also observed when adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels were applied in patients with acute kidney injury (negative predictive value, 98.8%; sensitivity, 95.8%; specificity, 39.2%) and/or "acute on chronic" renal dysfunction (negative predictive value, 98.0%; sensitivity, 92.9%; specificity, 48.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: D-Dimer cutoff levels adjusted for renal dysfunction appear feasible and safe assessing thromboembolic disease in critically ill patients. Furthermore, adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels seem reliable in patients with acute kidney injury and "acute on chronic" renal dysfunction. In patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m, the false-positive rate can be reduced when estimated glomerular filtration rate-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels are applied.
DESIGN: Single-center retrospective data analysis from electronic healthcare records of all emergency department patients admitted for suspected thromboembolic disease.
SETTING: Tertiary care academic hospital.
SUBJECTS: Exclusion criteria were as follows: age less than 16 years old, patients with active bleeding, and/or incomplete records.
INTERVENTIONS: Test characteristics of previously suggested that estimated glomerular filtration rate-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels (> 333 µg/L [estimated glomerular filtration rate, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m], > 1,306 µg/L [30-60 mL/min/1.73 m], and > 1,663 µg/L [< 30 mL/min/1.73 m]) were validated and compared with the conventional D-dimer cutoff level of 500 µg/L.
MAIN RESULTS: A total of 14,477 patients were included in the final analysis, with 467 patients (3.5%) diagnosed with thromboembolic disease. Renal dysfunction was observed in 1,364 (9.4%) of the total population. When adjusted D-dimer levels were applied, test characteristics remained stable: negative predictive value (> 99%), sensitivity (91.2% vs 93.4%), and specificity (42.7% vs 50.7%) when compared with the conventional D-dimer cutoff level to rule out thromboembolic disease (< 500 µg/L). Comparable characteristics were also observed when adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels were applied in patients with acute kidney injury (negative predictive value, 98.8%; sensitivity, 95.8%; specificity, 39.2%) and/or "acute on chronic" renal dysfunction (negative predictive value, 98.0%; sensitivity, 92.9%; specificity, 48.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: D-Dimer cutoff levels adjusted for renal dysfunction appear feasible and safe assessing thromboembolic disease in critically ill patients. Furthermore, adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels seem reliable in patients with acute kidney injury and "acute on chronic" renal dysfunction. In patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m, the false-positive rate can be reduced when estimated glomerular filtration rate-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels are applied.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app