Diagnostic value of D-dimer combined with Wells score for suspected pulmonary embolism

Objective: To evaluate the value of conventional and age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value combined with 2-level Wells score for diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism.

Methods: In the study, 335 patients with suspected pulmonary embolism who visited Peking University People's Hospital were enrolled retrospectively, then 274 patients with age over fifty years were chosen. The 2-level Wells score was applied to evaluate the clinical probability of pulmonary embolism, the diagnostic value of traditional D-dimer cut-off value (500 μg/L) and age adjusted D-dimer cut-off value (age×10 μg/L above 50 years) combined with Wells score no greater than 4 were compared. Computed tomography pulmonary arteriography (CTPA) was considered as the gold standard for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.

Results: (1) The area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) in analysis of the combination of Wells score no greater than 4 and traditional D-dimer cut-off value was 0.764 (95%CI: 0.703-0.818). On the other hand, the AUC in a ROC analysis of the combination of Wells Score no greater than 4 and age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value was 0.814 (95%CI:0.756-0.863). These two results did not differ statistically (Z=0.05, P=0.121). (2) The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Youden index of the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism of the combination of traditional D-dimer cut-off value and 2-level Wells Score were 100%, 48.9%, 28.8%, 100%, and 0.49, respectively. Meanwhile, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Youden index of the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism of the combination of age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value and 2-level Wells Score were 97.4%, 62.3%, 35.5%, 99.1%, and 0.60, respectively. Compared with using traditional D-dimer cut-off value, using age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value could improve the diagnosis specificity (traditional D-dimer cut-off value group: 48.9%, age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value group: 62.3%) of pulmonary embolism without reducing the sensitivity (traditional D-dimer cut-off value group: 100%, age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value group: 99.1%). (3) Among the 222 patients with Wells Score no greater than 4, 90 patients were with D-dimer less than traditional cut-off value (500 μg/L), and 25 patients (account for 11.3% of all 222 patients) were with D-dimer between traditional cut-off value and age-adjusted cut-off value.

Conclusions: The application of age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value can improve the diagnostic specificity of pulmonary embolism in patients over 50 years, without reducing the sensitivity. It can be used for ruling out suspected pulmonary embolism safely.