0
Abstract: Poster Presentations |

CAN WE RELY ON THE D-DIMER ASSAY FOR PROGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT ACROSS ACUTE PULMONARY EMBOLISM? FREE TO VIEW

Rogerio P. Teixeira, MD*; Paulo Mendes, MD; Rui Baptista, MD; Elisabete Jorge, MD; Fatima Saraiva, MD; Graca Castro, MD; Francisco Gonçalves, MD; Pedro Monteiro, PhD; Luis Providencia, PhD
Author and Funding Information

Coimbra University Hospitals - Cardiology Department, Coimbra, Portugal


Chest


Chest. 2009;136(4_MeetingAbstracts):149S. doi:10.1378/chest.136.4_MeetingAbstracts.149S
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Abstract

PURPOSE:  To assess Pulmonay Embolism (PE) prognosis stratified by the D-dimer assay.

METHODS:  Retrospective, longitudinal, continuous analysis of 135 patients admitted for an acute pulmonary embolism between 2000 and 2008 in a single center.Two groups were created based on the D-dimer level: A (n = 71) D-dimer ≤ 9.85 mg/ml; B (n = 42) D-dimer > 9.85 mg/ml. The primary end-point was a composite of in-hospital mortality and the need for escalation of treatment defined by one of the following: infusion of catecholamine, endotracheal intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. A clinical follow up was performed targeting all cause mortality and PE recurrence (median time follow up 764 days).

RESULTS:  The mean D-dimer value for the population was 14.1 ± 22.3 mg/ml. A D-dimer of 9.85 had a 61.5% sensitivity and 66.6% specificity for the primary outcome. There were no differences between groups with respect to demographics. Both groups had a similar rate of cancer (13.3 vs 11.4% p = 0.78), venous insufficiency, deep vein thrombosis, heart failure, known thrombophilia, recent history of surgery and also with respect to clinical presentation. The rate of cardiogenic shock was similar between groups, but there were a higher rate of markers of right ventricular dysfunction and myocardial injury for group B (38.3 vs 64.7% p = 0.027). There were no correlation between the d-dimer, arterial blood gases, and cardiac biomarkers. Thrombolysis was performed in a similar rate for both groups (84.1 vs 82.7% p = 0.18), and there were no significant differences between them regarding bleeding rate. Seven percent of group A versus 19.0% of group B patients (p = 0.05) reached the primary endpoint, although at follow up the rate of the selected endpoint was similar for both groups (8.9 vs 10.0% p = 0.87). On a multivariate analysis that also included age, cardiogenic shock and thrombolysis, the D-dimer no longer remained significant for in-hospital outcome.

CONCLUSION:  In our population D-dimer was a weak prognostic marker weather in the hospital, or in the medium term.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS:  Local prognostic data of adiagnostic marker of PE.

DISCLOSURE:  Rogerio Teixeira, No Financial Disclosure Information; No Product/Research Disclosure Information

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

12:45 PM - 2:00 PM


Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543