Logo

Log In Sign Up |  An official publication of: American College of Emergency Physicians
Navigation
  • Home
  • Multimedia
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
  • Clinical
    • Airway Managment
    • Case Reports
    • Critical Care
    • Guidelines
    • Imaging & Ultrasound
    • Pain & Palliative Care
    • Pediatrics
    • Resuscitation
    • Trauma & Injury
  • Resource Centers
    • mTBI Resource Center
  • Career
    • Practice Management
      • Benchmarking
      • Reimbursement & Coding
      • Care Team
      • Legal
      • Operations
      • Quality & Safety
    • Awards
    • Certification
    • Compensation
    • Early Career
    • Education
    • Leadership
    • Profiles
    • Retirement
    • Work-Life Balance
  • Columns
    • ACEP4U
    • Airway
    • Benchmarking
    • Brief19
    • By the Numbers
    • Coding Wizard
    • EM Cases
    • End of the Rainbow
    • Equity Equation
    • FACEPs in the Crowd
    • Forensic Facts
    • From the College
    • Images in EM
    • Kids Korner
    • Medicolegal Mind
    • Opinion
      • Break Room
      • New Spin
      • Pro-Con
    • Pearls From EM Literature
    • Policy Rx
    • Practice Changers
    • Problem Solvers
    • Residency Spotlight
    • Resident Voice
    • Skeptics’ Guide to Emergency Medicine
    • Sound Advice
    • Special OPs
    • Toxicology Q&A
    • WorldTravelERs
  • Resources
    • ACEP.org
    • ACEP Knowledge Quiz
    • Issue Archives
    • CME Now
    • Annual Scientific Assembly
      • ACEP14
      • ACEP15
      • ACEP16
      • ACEP17
      • ACEP18
      • ACEP19
    • Annals of Emergency Medicine
    • JACEP Open
    • Emergency Medicine Foundation
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Medical Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Awards
    • Authors
    • Article Submission
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright Information

Adjusting D-Dimer Test Thresholds Could Reduce Unnecessary Imaging

By Ryan Patrick Radecki, MD, MS | on September 5, 2017 | 1 Comment
Pearls From the Medical Literature
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

There are a few oddities specific to the YEARS protocol precluding universal recommendation as is. Most important, D-dimer results were routinely available prior to risk stratification. This meant clinicians had access to the D-dimer result when assessing the patient as “PE is most likely diagnosis.” It is naive to expect foreknowledge of the D-dimer result did not influence their risk stratification, introducing potentially detrimental effects on internal validity and certainly on generalizability.

You Might Also Like
  • Myths in Emergency Medicine: Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiograms as Imaging Standard, and Radiographs for Pelvic Trauma
  • Pearls from Emergency Medicine Literature on Pulmonary Problems, Bleeding, Evaluating Pediatric Injuries, and More
  • Pulmonary Emboli May Be an Under-Recognized Cause of Syncope
Explore This Issue
ACEP Now: Vol 36 – No 08 – August 2017

At the least, these prospective results, along with the retrospective and observational series, support revisiting our thresholds for D-dimer. In patients for whom PE is not likely, it is probably reasonable practice to consider D-dimer results below 1,000 ng/mL as properly further decreasing the likelihood of PE. Overtesting and overdiagnosis of PE have long been recognized as problematic, and applying even this simplest additional layer of Bayesian reasoning to testing for PE will help our patients by decreasing the costs and harms from testing without a disproportionate increase in harms from missed PE.

References

  1. Righini M, Van Es J, Den Exter PL, et al. Age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels to rule out pulmonary embolism: the ADJUST-PE study. JAMA. 2014;311(11):1117-1124.
  2. Kohn MA, Klok FA, van Es N. D-dimer interval likelihood ratios for pulmonary embolism. Acad Emerg Med. 2017;24(7):832-837.
  3. Barritt DW, Jordan SC. Anticoagulant drugs in the treatment of pulmonary embolism. A controlled trial. Lancet. 1960;1(7138):1309-1312.
  4. Kline JA, Hogg MM, Courtney DM, et al. D-dimer threshold increase with pretest probability unlikely for pulmonary embolism to decrease unnecessary computerized tomographic pulmonary angiography. J Thromb Haemost. 2012;10(4):572-581.
  5. Char S, Yoon HC. Improving appropriate use of pulmonary computed tomography angiography by increasing the serum D-dimer threshold and assessing clinical probability. Perm J. 2014;18(4):10-15.
  6. van der Hulle T, Cheung WY, Kooij S, et al. Simplified diagnostic management of suspected pulmonary embolism (the YEARS study): a prospective, multicentre, cohort study [published online ahead of print May 23, 2017]. Lancet.
  7. van der Hulle T, den Exter PL, Erkens PG, et al. Variable D-dimer thresholds for diagnosis of clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2013;11(11):1986-1992.
  8. van Es J, Beenen LF, Douma RA, et al. A simple decision rule including D-dimer to reduce the need for computed tomography scanning in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2015;13(8):1428-1435.

Pages: 1 2 3 | Single Page

Topics: AdjustD-DimerEmergency DepartmentEmergency MedicineEmergency PhysiciansImaging and UltrasoundPatient CarePulmonaryPulmonary EmbolismThreshold

Related

  • Let Core Values Help Guide Patient Care

    November 5, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • Event Medicine: Where Fun and Safety Sing in Perfect Harmony

    October 9, 2025 - 1 Comment
  • Case Report: Rare Pulmonary Embolism After Routine PIVC Insertion

    September 22, 2025 - 1 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP Now: November 2025

Download PDF

Read More

About the Author

Ryan Patrick Radecki, MD, MS

Ryan Patrick Radecki, MD, MS, is an emergency physician and informatician with Christchurch Hospital in Christchurch, New Zealand. He is the Annals of Emergency Medicine podcast co-host and Journal Club editor and can be found on Twitter @emlitofnote.

View this author's posts »

One Response to “Adjusting D-Dimer Test Thresholds Could Reduce Unnecessary Imaging”

  1. September 17, 2017

    Bruce D. Oran, DO, FACEP, Clinical Assistant Professor, Ronald O. Perelman Center for Emergency Services, NYU School of Medicine Reply

    Excellent analysis of the literature on this topic. Not mentioned but also an important point is the effect and kinetics of D-dimer following recent surgery and effect of malignancy on d-dimer, both risk factors for PE. Raising the test thresholds would also help somewhat mitigate these confounding factors.

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*
*


Wiley
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • Advertise
  • Cookie Preferences
Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 2333-2603