Your institution is subscribed to Read Institutional Edition. Log in or Sign Up to read full text articles.

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy

Meha Bhatt, Cody Braun, Payal Patel, Parth Patel, Housne Begum, Wojtek Wiercioch, Jamie Varghese, David Wooldridge, Hani J Alturkmani, Merrill Thomas, Mariam Baig, Waled Bahaj, Rasha Khatib, Rohan Kehar, Rakesh Ponnapureddy, Anchal Sethi, Ahmad Mustafa, Robby Nieuwlaat, Wendy Lim, Shannon M Bates, Eddy Lang, Grégoire Le Gal, Marc Righini, Nedaa M Husainat, Mohamad A Kalot, Yazan Nayif Al Jabiri, Holger J Schünemann, Reem A Mustafa
Blood Advances 2020 April 14, 4 (7): 1250-1264
32227213
Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremities can be associated with significant morbidity and may progress to pulmonary embolism and postthrombotic syndrome. Early diagnosis and treatment are important to minimize the risk of these complications. We systematically reviewed the accuracy of diagnostic tests for first-episode and recurrent DVT of the lower extremities, including proximal compression ultrasonography (US), whole leg US, serial US, and high-sensitivity quantitative D-dimer assays. We searched Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for eligible studies, reference lists of relevant reviews, registered trials, and relevant conference proceedings. Two investigators screened and abstracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. We pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. The review included 43 studies. For any suspected DVT, the pooled estimates for sensitivity and specificity of proximal compression US were 90.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86.5-92.8) and 98.5% (95% CI, 97.6-99.1), respectively. For whole-leg US, pooled estimates were 94.0% (95% CI, 91.3-95.9) and 97.3% (95% CI, 94.8-98.6); for serial US pooled estimates were 97.9% (95% CI, 96.0-98.9) and 99.8% (95% CI, 99.3-99.9). For D-dimer, pooled estimates were 96.1% (95% CI, 92.6-98.0) and 35.7% (95% CI, 29.5-42.4). Recurrent DVT studies were not pooled. Certainty of evidence varied from low to high. This systematic review of current diagnostic tests for DVT of the lower extremities provides accuracy estimates. The tests are evaluated when performed in a stand-alone fashion, and in a diagnostic pathway. The pretest probability of DVT often assessed by a clinical decision rule will influence how, together with sensitivity and specificity estimates, patients will be managed.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
32227213
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"

We want to hear from doctors like you!

Take a second to answer a survey question.