Excluding venous thromboembolism using point of care D-dimer tests in outpatients: a diagnostic meta-analysis

Objective To review the evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of the currently available point of care D-dimer tests for excluding venous thromboembolism. Design Systematic review of research on the accuracy of point of care D-dimer tests, using bivariate regression to examine sources of variation and to estimate sensitivity and specificity. Data sources Studies on the diagnostic accuracy of point of care D-dimer tests published between January 1995 and September 2008 and available in either Medline or Embase. Review methods The analysis included studies that compared point of care D-dimer tests with predefined reference criteria for venous thromboembolism, enrolled consecutive outpatients, and allowed for construction of a 2×2 table. Results 23 studies (total number of patients 13 959, range in mean age 38-65 years, range of venous thromboembolism prevalence 4-51%) were included in the meta-analysis. The studies reported two qualitative point of care D-dimer tests (SimpliRED D-dimer (n=12) and Clearview Simplify D-dimer (n=7)) and two quantitative point of care D-dimer tests (Cardiac D-dimer (n=4) and Triage D-dimer (n=2)). Overall sensitivity ranged from 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.78 to 0.90) to 0.96 (0.91 to 0.98) and overall specificity from 0.48 (0.33 to 0.62) to 0.74 (0.69 to 0.78). The two quantitative tests Cardiac D-dimer and Triage D-dimer scored most favourably. Conclusions In outpatients suspected of venous thromboembolism, point of care D-dimer tests can contribute important information and guide patient management, notably in low risk patients (that is, those patients with a low score on a clinical decision rule).

[1]  H. Büller,et al.  Embolus location affects the sensitivity of a rapid quantitative D-dimer assay in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. , 2002, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[2]  M. Siadaty,et al.  D-dimer testing for deep venous thrombosis: a metaanalysis. , 2004, Clinical chemistry.

[3]  H. Bounameaux,et al.  Diagnosing pulmonary embolism: running after the decreasing prevalence of cases among suspected patients , 2004, Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH.

[4]  D. Sackett,et al.  The Ends of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity , 1992, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[5]  Roger M. Harbord,et al.  METANDI: Stata module to perform meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy , 2008 .

[6]  G. Eiger,et al.  Limited interobserver agreement in the SimpliRED d‐dimer assay , 2003, Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH.

[7]  Karel G M Moons,et al.  Ruling out deep venous thrombosis in primary care , 2005, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[8]  S. Doucette,et al.  Does this patient have deep vein thrombosis? , 1998, JAMA.

[9]  A. Panju,et al.  Does this patient have pulmonary embolism? , 2003, JAMA.

[10]  C. Kluft,et al.  The Harmonization of Quantitative Test Results of Different D-Dimer Methods , 2005, Seminars in vascular medicine.

[11]  J. Deeks,et al.  A methodological review of how heterogeneity has been examined in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. , 2005, Health technology assessment.

[12]  R. Logan,et al.  Clinical Epidemiology: A Basic Science for Clinical Medicine , 1992 .

[13]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. , 1999, JAMA.

[14]  Johannes B Reitsma,et al.  Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  R. Kravitz,et al.  Combined use of rapid D-dimer testing and estimation of clinical probability in the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis: systematic review , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[16]  D. Henson,et al.  The effectiveness of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph and laser diagnostic glaucoma scanning system (GDx) in detecting and monitoring glaucoma. , 2005, Health technology assessment.

[17]  J. Lijmer,et al.  Comparison of a Clinical Probability Estimate and Two Clinical Models in Patients with Suspected Pulmonary Embolism , 2000, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[18]  Peter Jüni,et al.  Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. , 2002, International journal of epidemiology.

[19]  H. Büller,et al.  Can causes of false-normal D-dimer test [SimpliRED] results be identified? , 2003, Thrombosis research.

[20]  A. Hoes,et al.  Limited value of patient history and physical examination in diagnosing deep vein thrombosis in primary care. , 2004, Family practice.

[21]  Jeffrey S. Ginsberg,et al.  Comparison of a Clinical Probability Estimate and Two Clinical Models in Patients with Suspected Pulmonary Embolism , 2000, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[22]  M. Prins,et al.  Management studies using a combination of D‐dimer test result and clinical probability to rule out venous thromboembolism: a systematic review , 2005, Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH.

[23]  William A Ghali,et al.  d-Dimer for the Exclusion of Acute Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[24]  Steve Goodacre,et al.  Bmc Medical Imaging Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography for Deep Vein Thrombosis , 2005 .

[25]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  BMC Medical Research Methodology , 2002 .

[26]  L E Moses,et al.  Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. , 1993, Statistics in medicine.

[27]  Arnaud Perrier,et al.  Prediction of Pulmonary Embolism in the Emergency Department: The Revised Geneva Score , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[28]  Pieter W Kamphuisen,et al.  Effectiveness of managing suspected pulmonary embolism using an algorithm combining clinical probability, D-dimer testing, and computed tomography. , 2006, JAMA.