Abstract
OBJECTIVES
The D-dimer level, fibrinogen level, and D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio are used in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, but results vary. We evaluated these parameters in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in emergency clinic patients.
METHODS
In this prospective study, 200 patients (pulmonary embolism, 100 patients; no pulmonary embolism, 100 patients) had D-dimer and fibrinogen levels measured before intervention. Pulmonary embolism was diagnosed with computed tomography angiography or ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy.
RESULTS
Compared with patients who did not have pulmonary embolism, patients who had pulmonary embolism had significantly greater mean D-dimer level (pulmonary embolism, 6±7 μg/ml; no pulmonary embolism, 1±1 μg/ml; P⩽0·001) and D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio (pulmonary embolism, 3±3; no pulmonary embolism, 0·4±0·4; P⩽0·001), but similar mean fibrinogen levels (pulmonary embolism, 337±184 mg/dl; no pulmonary embolism, 384±200 mg/dl; not significant). In patients who had pulmonary embolism, mean D-dimer level and D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio were greater in high-risk than non-high-risk patients. With D-dimer cutoff 0·35 μg/ml, sensitivity was high (100%) and specificity was low (27%) for pulmonary embolism. With D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio cutoff 0·13, sensitivity was high (100%) and specificity was low (37%) for pulmonary embolism.
CONCLUSION
A D-dimer level <0·35 μg/ml may exclude the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. At a D-dimer cutoff 0·5 μg/ml and D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio cutoff 1·0, the D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio may have better specificity than D-dimer level in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, but the D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio may lack sufficient specificity in screening.
Collapse