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.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reassessing the positive community D-dimer: can we safely reduce imaging?Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.