Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28116533›Full record

ArticleEmergency radiology2017

Negative D-dimer testing excludes pulmonary embolism in non-high risk patients in the emergency department.

John B Harringa, Rebecca L Bracken, Scott K Nagle, Mark L Schiebler, Michael S Pulia, James E Svenson, Michael D Repplinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. State-of-the-Art Imaging for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2018
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

John B HarringaBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 800 University Bay Drive, Suite 310, Mail Code 9123, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
Rebecca L BrackenBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 800 University Bay Drive, Suite 310, Mail Code 9123, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
Scott K NagleDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Mark L SchieblerDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Michael S PuliaBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 800 University Bay Drive, Suite 310, Mail Code 9123, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
James E SvensonBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 800 University Bay Drive, Suite 310, Mail Code 9123, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
Michael D RepplingerBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 800 University Bay Drive, Suite 310, Mail Code 9123, Madison, WI, 53705, USA. mdreppli@medicine.wisc.edu.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$32.2M
Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardKL2TR000428 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$6.2M
Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Radiation-Free Imaging Protocols in the Emergency DepartmentK08DK111234 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI REPPLINGER, MICHAEL DEAN · 2016 to 2018
$488k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000428NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000427NIDDK NIH HHS K08 DK111234NIDDK NIH HHS L30 DK106864
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the ability of d-dimer testing to obviate the need for cross-sectional imaging for patients at "non-high risk" for pulmonary embolism (PE).

methodsThis is a retrospective study of emergency department patients at an academic medical center who underwent cross-sectional imaging (MRA or CTA) to evaluate for PE from 2008 to 2013. The primary outcome was the NPV of d-dimer testing when used in conjunction with clinical decision instruments (CDIs = Wells', Revised Geneva, and Simplified Revised Geneva Scores). The reference standard for PE status included image test results and a 6-month chart review follow-up for venous thromboembolism as a proxy for false negative imaging. Secondary analyses included ROC curves for each CDI and calculation of PE prevalence in each risk stratum.

resultsOf 459 patients, 41 (8.9%) had PE. None of the 76 patients (16.6%) with negative d-dimer results had PE. Thus, d-dimer testing had 100% sensitivity and NPV, and there were no differences in CDI performance. Similarly, when evaluated independently of d-dimer results, no CDI outperformed the others (areas under the ROC curves ranged 0.53-0.55). There was a significantly higher PE prevalence in the high versus "non-high risk" groups when stratified by the Wells' Score (p = 0.03).

conclusionsNegative d-dimer testing excluded PE in our retrospective cohort. Each CDI had similar NPVs, whether analyzed in conjunction with or independently of d-dimer results. Our results confirm that PE can be safely excluded in patients with "non-high risk" CDI scores and a negative d-dimer.

Indexed as

AdultComputed Tomography AngiographyDecision Support TechniquesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation ProductsHumansMagnetic Resonance AngiographyMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPulmonary EmbolismRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Productsfibrin fragment DClinical decision instrumentsCTD-dimerMRIPulmonary embolism

Identifiers

PMID28116533
PMCPMC5438894
OpenAlexW2581211238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.