Mission N.M.A./PRIFAS d´etude et de prospective dans le Nordeste Bresilien: 7 au 23 juillet 1990.

bitstream/item/116980/1/1594.pd

Evaluation of a new, rapid, and quantitative D-Dimer test in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism.

International audiencePrevious studies have suggested the utility of D-Dimer ELISA assays in eliminating a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE). Our objectives were to evaluate the performance of a new, rapid, quantitative, and automated Liatest D-Dimer Assay in patients with suspected PE. Three hundred eighty-six consecutive patients referred to our institution between March 1992 and December 1996 for clinically suspected PE, with recent clinical signs not exceeding 1 wk, were included in this study. Diagnosis of PE was based on clinical evaluation, radionuclide lung imaging, lower limb examination, and, when required, pulmonary angiography. D-Dimer performances, for both Liatest D-Dimer and standard D-Dimer ELISA (Asserachrom DDi), assays, were assessed at the end of the study. Among the 386 patients tested, 146 (37.8%) were classified as PE-positive. Liatest D-Dimer assay had a 100% sensitivity (95% confidence interval, 97 to 100%) and a negative predictive value of 100% (95% confidence interval, 94 to 100%). A normal result, below the cutoff of 500 ng/ml, occurred in 83 of the 386 (21%) patients. There was a strong agreement between Liatest D-Dimer and Asserachrom DDi analyses. These findings suggest that this rapid, quantitative, and automated D-Dimer assay provides a useful diagnostic tool for the clinician with regard to exclusion of PE

Evaluation of a new rapid D-dimer assay for clinically suspected deep venous thrombosis (Liatest D-dimer).

International audienceIn previous studies, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) for plasma D-dimer analysis have demonstrated high sensitivity, suggesting their potential usefulness in excluding deep venous thrombosis (DVT). We evaluated the usefulness of a new D-dimer test (Liatest D-dimer) for suspected DVT in a prospective study of patients admitted to the hospital because of recent (not exceeding 1 week before admission) clinical signs. Contrast venography or compression ultrasonography or both were performed within 24 hours of admission. A new quantitative determination of D-dimer concentration using a suspension of microlatex particles coated with specific antibodies was tested. A standard plasma D-dimer ELISA measurement was also performed. Of 464 patients, 276 had a proven DVT (distal, 74; proximal, 202). For a cutoff level of 400 ng/mL, sensitivity of the Liatest method in the diagnosis of overall DVT was 94.6% (95% confidence interval, 92.0%-97.0%), and the specificity was 35% (95% confidence interval, 28%-42%). The sensitivity and negative predictive value were 98.5% and 95.6%, respectively, in the diagnosis of proximal DVT, but only 83.8% and 84.6%, respectively, in the diagnosis of distal DVT. This new rapid Liatest D-dimer assay seems to be highly sensitive and could replace the ELISA method in excluding patients with proximal DVT. Both methods provide lower sensitivity for distal DVT

Evaluation of a new rapid D-dimer assay for clinically suspected deep venous thrombosis (Liatest D-dimer).

International audienceIn previous studies, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) for plasma D-dimer analysis have demonstrated high sensitivity, suggesting their potential usefulness in excluding deep venous thrombosis (DVT). We evaluated the usefulness of a new D-dimer test (Liatest D-dimer) for suspected DVT in a prospective study of patients admitted to the hospital because of recent (not exceeding 1 week before admission) clinical signs. Contrast venography or compression ultrasonography or both were performed within 24 hours of admission. A new quantitative determination of D-dimer concentration using a suspension of microlatex particles coated with specific antibodies was tested. A standard plasma D-dimer ELISA measurement was also performed. Of 464 patients, 276 had a proven DVT (distal, 74; proximal, 202). For a cutoff level of 400 ng/mL, sensitivity of the Liatest method in the diagnosis of overall DVT was 94.6% (95% confidence interval, 92.0%-97.0%), and the specificity was 35% (95% confidence interval, 28%-42%). The sensitivity and negative predictive value were 98.5% and 95.6%, respectively, in the diagnosis of proximal DVT, but only 83.8% and 84.6%, respectively, in the diagnosis of distal DVT. This new rapid Liatest D-dimer assay seems to be highly sensitive and could replace the ELISA method in excluding patients with proximal DVT. Both methods provide lower sensitivity for distal DVT