What level of D-dimers can safely exclude pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency department?

Objectives To identify which level of D-dimer would allow the safe exclusion of pulmonary embolism (PE) in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Methods This retrospective study was conducted on the COVID database of Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP). COVID-19...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European radiology 2022-04, Vol.32 (4), p.2704-2712
Hauptverfasser: Revel, Marie-Pierre, Beeker, Nathanael, Porcher, Raphael, Jilet, Léa, Fournier, Laure, Rance, Bastien, Chassagnon, Guillaume, Fontenay, Michaela, Sanchez, Olivier
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives To identify which level of D-dimer would allow the safe exclusion of pulmonary embolism (PE) in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Methods This retrospective study was conducted on the COVID database of Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP). COVID-19 patients who presented at the ED of AP-HP hospitals between March 1 and May 15, 2020, and had CTPA following D-dimer dosage within 48h of presentation were included. The D-dimer sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for different D-dimer thresholds, as well as the false-negative and failure rates, and the number of CTPAs potentially avoided. Results A total of 781 patients (mean age 62.0 years, 53.8% men) with positive RT-PCR for SARS-Cov-2 were included and 60 of them (7.7%) had CTPA-confirmed PE. Their median D-dimer level was significantly higher than that of patients without PE (4,013 vs 1,198 ng·mL −1 , p   50 years, the sensitivity and the NPV were above 90%. With these thresholds, 17.1% and 31.5% of CTPAs could have been avoided, respectively. Four of the 178 patients who had a D-dimer below the age-adjusted cutoff had PE, leading to an acceptable failure rate of 2.2%. Using higher D-dimer cut-offs could have avoided more CTPAs, but would have lowered the sensitivity and increased the failure rate. Conclusion The same D-Dimer thresholds as those validated in non-COVID outpatients should be used to safely rule out PE. Key Points • The median D-dimer level was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients with PE as compared to those without PE (4,013 ng·mL −1 vs 1,198 ng·mL −1 respectively, p  
ISSN:0938-7994
1432-1084
DOI:10.1007/s00330-021-08377-9