Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34171532›Full record

Observational studyJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2022

The clinical significance of ultra-high D-dimer levels.

Kristin Schafer, Eric Goldschmidt, Drew Oostra, John Fish, Todd Russell, Fedor Lurie

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Modulatory role ofiScience · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Significance of D-Dimer Levels in the Evaluation of Postoperative Muscular Calf Vein Thrombosis: A Restricted Cubic Spline Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    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

6 authors.

Kristin SchaferUniversity of Toledo College of Medicine, Toledo, Ohio.
Eric GoldschmidtUniversity of Toledo College of Medicine, Toledo, Ohio.
Drew OostraJobst Vascular Institute, Toledo, Ohio.
John FishJobst Vascular Institute, Toledo, Ohio.
Todd RussellJobst Vascular Institute, Toledo, Ohio.
Fedor LurieJobst Vascular Institute, Toledo, Ohio. Electronic address: fedor.lurie@promedica.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePlasma D-dimer levels >5000 ng/mL are encountered in a number of conditions other than venous thromboembolism (VTE). Recent studies have used plasma D-dimer levels as a prognostic indicator for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. The implications of abnormal levels are less clear for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with a baseline elevation in plasma D-dimer levels. In the present study, we reviewed the occurrence of plasma D-dimer levels >5000 ng/mL and investigated the clinical significance of this finding before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsInpatient records for a 4-year period were screened for laboratory results of plasma D-dimer levels >5000 ng/mL. The patient data were reviewed for the clinical identifiers commonly associated with elevated plasma D-dimer levels, including VTE, cancer, sepsis, pneumonia, other infection, bleeding, and trauma. The patients were then categorized into groups stratified by the plasma D-dimer level to allow for comparisons between the various clinical diagnoses.

resultsA total of 671 patients were included in the present study. VTE was the most common diagnosis for patients with a plasma D-dimer level >5000 ng/mL, followed by cancer and pneumonia. Multiple clinical diagnoses were present in 61% of the patients. No clear cause for the ultra-high plasma D-dimer level could be identified in 11.3% of the patients. Among the patients lacking a clinical diagnosis at discharge, mortality was 24% in the 5000- to 10,000-ng/mL group, 28.6% in the 10,000- to 15,000-ng/mL group, and 75% in the >15,000-ng/mL group.

conclusionsVTE, cancer, and pneumonia were frequently present when ultra-high plasma D-dimer levels were encountered, and mortality was high when the levels were >15,000 ng/mL. The results from our study from a pre-COVID-19 patient population suggest that ultra-high plasma D-dimer levels indicate the presence of severe underlying disease. This should be considered when using the plasma D-dimer level as a screening tool or prognostic indicator for COVID-19 infection.

Indexed as

AgedBiomarkersCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation ProductsFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleOhioPandemicsRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsVenous ThromboembolismBiomarkersFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Productsfibrin fragment DCancerCoronavirusD-dimerScreeningThrombosis

Identifiers

PMID34171532
PMCPMC8220196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.