Thromb Haemost 1993; 70(03): 408-413
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1649595
Original Article
Clinical Studies
Schattauer GmbH Stuttgart

A Comparative Analysis of D-Dimer Assays in Patients with Clinically Suspected Pulmonary Embolism

Authors

  • Edwin J R van Beek

    1   The Centre for Hemostasis, Thrombosis, Atherosclerosis and Inflammation Research, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Bram van den Ende

    2   The Department of Clinical Chemistry, Slotervaart Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • René J Berckmans

    1   The Centre for Hemostasis, Thrombosis, Atherosclerosis and Inflammation Research, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Yvonne T van der Heide

    2   The Department of Clinical Chemistry, Slotervaart Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Dees P M Brandjes

    1   The Centre for Hemostasis, Thrombosis, Atherosclerosis and Inflammation Research, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    3   The Department of Internal Medicine, Slotervaart Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Augueste Sturk

    1   The Centre for Hemostasis, Thrombosis, Atherosclerosis and Inflammation Research, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Jan W ten Cate

    1   The Centre for Hemostasis, Thrombosis, Atherosclerosis and Inflammation Research, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Received 27. Januar 1993

Accepted after revision 05. April 1993

Publikationsdatum:
05. Juli 2018 (online)

Preview

Summary

To avoid angiography in patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism and non-diagnostic lung scan results, the use of D-dimer has been advocated. We assessed plasma samples of 151 consecutive patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism. Lung scan results were: normal (43), high probability (48) and non-diagnostic (60; angiography performed in 43; 12 pulmonary emboli). Reproducibility, cut-off values, specificity, and percentage of patients in whom angiography could be avoided (with sensitivity 100%) were determined for two latex and four ELISA assays.

The latex methods (cut-off 500 μg/1) agreed with corresponding ELISA tests in 83% (15% normal latex, abnormal ELISA) and 81% (7% normal latex, abnormal ELISA). ELISA methods showed considerable within- (2–17%) and between-assay Variation (12–26%). Cut-off values were 25 μg/l (Behring), 50 μg/l (Agen), 300 μg/l (Stago) and 550 μg/l (Organon). Specificity was 14–38%; in 4–15% of patients angiography could be avoided.

We conclude that latex D-dimer assays appear not useful, whereas ELISA methods may be of limited value in the exclusion of pulmonary embolism.

Dr. E. J. R. van Beek is the recipient of a grant of the Netherlands Health Executive Insurance Board (OG91-036).