Observational studyMedicine2025
Optimal D-dimer value for acute deep vein thrombosis screening in the lower limb in cases with carcinomas.
Observational study in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
D-dimer is a recognized tool for screening venous thromboembolism, with the standardized cutoff value for the possibility of acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) being 1 μg/mL. For patients above the threshold, noninvasive ultrasonography examination is recommended. However, considering that carcinomatous status potentially increases D-dimer levels and shortage of ultrasonography technologists in Japan, the cutoff value should be optimized for patients with carcinomas. In total, 1124 consecutive cases from 2017 to 2021 in our division were evaluated. In the carcinoma group (n = 225), no significant association was found between the carcinoma stage (0-3 vs 4) and D-dimer levels (P = .54); therefore, staging was not considered in determining the optimal cutoff value. The median D-dimer level differed by 3.1 μg/mL between carcinomatous and non-carcinomatous states in cases without acute DVT in lower limbs. Thus, we tested the cutoff value of increasing D-dimer concentrations, and a cutoff value of 5 μg/mL demonstrated a high specificity of 42.9%. In screening for acute DVT in lower limbs for carcinoma cases, the D-dimer cutoff value may be increased from 1 to 5 μg/mL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.