Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 39, Issue 2 , Pages 144-152, February 2002

Criteria for the safe use of D -dimer testing in emergency department patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: A multicenter us study☆☆★★

  • Jeffrey A. Kline, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Emergency Medicine, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC
  • ,
  • R.Darrell Nelson, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Emergency Medicine, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC
  • ,
  • Raymond E. Jackson, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Emergency Medicine, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI.
  • ,
  • D.Mark Courtney, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Emergency Medicine, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC

Received 14 May 2001; received in revised form 11 September 2001 and 10 October 2001; accepted 30 October 2001.

Abstract 

Study Objective: We derive a decision rule to partition emergency department patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) into a small, high-risk group (>40% pretest probability) that is unsafe for D -dimer testing and a larger group that is safe to have PE ruled out with either a whole-blood D -dimer plus alveolar deadspace measurement or a quantitative D -dimer assay. Methods: Nine hundred thirty-four patients with suspected PE were studied at 7 urban EDs in the United States. Patients were prospectively interviewed and examined for recognized symptoms, signs, and risk factors associated with PE. These data were collected before standard objective imaging for PE. Selected variables were analyzed by multivariate logistic analysis to determine factors associated with PE (P <.05). A decision rule was then constructed to categorize approximately 80% of ED patients as safe for D -dimer testing. Results: Pretest prevalence of PE was 19.4% (181/934; 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.3% to 21.7%). Six variables found to be significant on multivariate analysis were used to construct the decision rule. Unsafe patients had either a shock index (heart rate/systolic blood pressure) more than 1.0 or age older than 50 years, together with any one of the following conditions: unexplained hypoxemia (SaO 2 <95%; no prior lung disease), unilateral leg swelling, recent major surgery, or hemoptysis. These criteria were met by 197 (21.0%) of 934 patients, and 83 of 197 (42.1%; 95% CI 35.3% to 49.6%) patients had PE. Exclusion of these 197 unsafe patients significantly decreased the probability of PE in the remaining 737 (79.0%) safe patients to 13.3% (95% CI 10.9% to 15.9%). Conclusion: Simple clinical criteria can permit safe D -dimer testing in the majority of ED patients with suspected PE. These criteria warrant prospective validation. [Kline JA, Nelson RD, Jackson RE, Courtney DM. Criteria for the safe use of D -dimer testing in emergency department patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a multicenter US study. Ann Emerg Med. February 2002;39:144-152.]

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Dr. Courtney is now affiliated with the Division of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL.

☆☆ Author contributions are provided at the end of this article.

 Supported in part by the Established Investigator Award from the Emergency Medicine Foundation.

★★ Address for reprints: Jeffrey A. Kline, MD, Emergency Medicine Clinical Research, PO Box 32861, Charlotte, NC 28323-2861;,704-355-7092, fax 704-355-7047.

PII: S0196-0644(02)86173-X

doi:10.1067/mem.2002.121398

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 39, Issue 2 , Pages 144-152, February 2002