American Journal of Emergency Medicine
Volume 25, Issue 4 , Pages 464-471, May 2007

The VIDAS D-dimer test for venous thromboembolism: a prospective surveillance study shows maintenance of sensitivity and specificity when used in normal clinical practice

  • David Mountain, FACEM

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Emergency Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Hospital Ave, Nedlands, Perth WA, Australia 6009. Tel.: +61 8 93463333; fax: +61 8 93463516.
  • ,
  • Ian Jacobs, PhD
  • ,
  • Andrew Haig, FACEM

Department of Emergency Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Australia

Department of Academic Emergency Medicine, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia

Department of Emergency Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia

Received 26 June 2006; received in revised form 18 September 2006; accepted 25 September 2006.

Abstract 

Background

As a result of a number of clinical management studies, D-dimer (DD) tests such as VIDAS (BioMérieux Australia P/L-Sydney, NSW) have been recommended to reduce venous thromboembolism (VTE) investigations. Surveillance studies for new tests are recommended. We prospectively assessed VIDAS DD in normal practice.

Methods

Consecutive emergency patients and inpatients (IPs) with DD or VTE investigations were prospectively identified. Investigation results and early chart review including predefined factors reducing specificity were documented. A latex DD was also performed. Patients were followed for at least 3 months for recurrent VTE.

Results

Four hundred three patients (emergency, 64%; VTE-positive, 12%; 95% followed up) were analyzed. VIDAS sensitivity was 96% (95% confidence interval 86%-99%), specificity 38% (confidence interval, 34%-44%; negative likelihood ratio, 0.11), and emergency specificity 51%. Latex sensitivity was 76%. Cancer, trauma, recent operations, IP status, and advanced age were associated with markedly reduced specificity. Specificity in older emergency patients (>70 years old) and younger IPs (<70) without comorbidities was 20% to 30%, but sensitivity was maintained at 100%.

Conclusions

VIDAS DD probably maintains adequate sensitivity in normal clinical practice for low- or even intermediate-risk patients. Latex agglutination had poor sensitivity. Specificity is best in younger low-morbidity emergency patients. These findings need validation in larger multicenter surveillance studies.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Data in this study have been presented as: Mountain D, Haig A. Presentation. A prospective observational study in an unselected population of the VIDAS D-dimer (VIDAS DD) test for excluding acute venous thrombo-embolic (VTE) disease shows retention of sensitivity and specificity in a real environment. ACEM/ASEM joint scientific meeting, November 2000, Canberra, Australia.

PII: S0735-6757(06)00392-5

doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2006.09.004

American Journal of Emergency Medicine
Volume 25, Issue 4 , Pages 464-471, May 2007