Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42592082›Full record

Observational studyResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2026

Reassessment strategy to reduce chest imaging in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism and elevated D-dimer: an exploratory cohort study.

Coline Bittermann, Elisa Gicquel, Delphine Douillet, Catherine Ternisien, Quentin Le Bastard, Suzanne Nave, Mathieu Servent, Eric Batard, François Javaudin

Abstract readObservational StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Reassessing the positive community D-dimer: can we safely reduce imaging?Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026
    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

9 authors.

Coline BittermannNantes Université, CHU Nantes, INSERM, Service des Urgences, CIC 1413, Immuno-infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Elisa GicquelNantes Université, CHU Nantes, INSERM, Service des Urgences, CIC 1413, Immuno-infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Delphine DouilletAngers University Hospital, Emergency Department, Angers, France.
Catherine TernisienNantes Université, CHU Nantes, Centre de Ressources et de Compétences des Maladies Hémorragiques Constitutionnelles, Nantes, France.
Quentin Le BastardNantes Université, CHU Nantes, INSERM, Service des Urgences, CIC 1413, Immuno-infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Suzanne NaveNantes Université, CHU Nantes, INSERM, Service des Urgences, CIC 1413, Immuno-infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Mathieu ServentAngers University Hospital, Emergency Department, Angers, France.
Eric BatardNantes Université, CHU Nantes, INSERM, Service des Urgences, CIC 1413, Immuno-infectiologie, Nantes, France.
François JavaudinNantes Université, CHU Nantes, INSERM, Service des Urgences, CIC 1413, Immuno-infectiologie, Nantes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patients referred by community physicians to the emergency department (ED) for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) with an elevated D-dimer result often undergo chest imaging, although the appropriate diagnostic strategy in this setting remains unclear.] as per style before objectives. Objectives: This study evaluated whether a standardized 3-step reassessment strategy could reduce chest imaging in these patients. Methods: Using data from an observational cohort study conducted in 2 French EDs between May 2022 and May 2023, a standardized 3-step reassessment strategy was retrospectively applied. The strategy combined (1) clinical probability reassessment, (2) adjustment of community laboratory D-dimer thresholds, and (3) repeat D-dimer testing in the ED using the VIDAS assay when indicated. Adult patients referred for suspected PE with a community D-dimer level of >500 ng/mL were included. The primary outcome was the proportion of chest imaging studies that would have been avoided. Results: Seventy-five patients were analyzed (median age, 59 years; 57% women). Application of the reassessment strategy would have avoided chest imaging in 37 patients, corresponding to an absolute reduction of 49 percentage points (95% CI, 37-60). Imaging avoidance occurred at step 1 in 11 patients (absolute reduction, 15 percentage points; 95% CI, 7-24), at step 2 in 14 patients (19 percentage points; 95% CI, 10-29), and at step 3 in 12 patients (16 percentage points; 95% CI, 8-26). The failure rate was 1% (95% CI, 0-7). Conclusion: In patients referred to the ED for suspected PE with an elevated community D-dimer result, application of a standardized reassessment strategy could reduce chest imaging by approximately half. The safety and generalizability of this approach warrant evaluation in larger, prospectively designed studies.

Indexed as

Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation ProductsPulmonary EmbolismRadiography, ThoracicUnnecessary ProceduresAdultAgedBiomarkersClinical RelevanceEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleFranceHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesBiomarkersFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Productsfibrin fragment Dchest imagingclinical decision rulesD-dimeremergency departmentpulmonary embolism

Identifiers

PMID42592082
PMCPMC13464025

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.