Cargando…

Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study

BACKGROUND: D-dimer is used widely as a diagnostic aid in low- and moderate-risk patients with suspected venous thromboembolism (VTE). While our laboratory utilizes VIDAS D-dimer analyzer (bioMérieux SA, France), our emergency department (ED) recently procured a D-dimer analyzer AQT90 FLEX (Radiomet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Perveen, Shuhana, Unwin, Danielle, Shetty, Amith Loknath
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3535194/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23301220
http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2013.33.1.34
_version_ 1782475399964393472
author Perveen, Shuhana
Unwin, Danielle
Shetty, Amith Loknath
author_facet Perveen, Shuhana
Unwin, Danielle
Shetty, Amith Loknath
author_sort Perveen, Shuhana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: D-dimer is used widely as a diagnostic aid in low- and moderate-risk patients with suspected venous thromboembolism (VTE). While our laboratory utilizes VIDAS D-dimer analyzer (bioMérieux SA, France), our emergency department (ED) recently procured a D-dimer analyzer AQT90 FLEX (Radiometer Medical ApS, Denmark) for point of care testing (POCT) to facilitate patient management. We aimed to determine whether the time taken to receive D-dimer results using the 2 different analyzers differed significantly and to quantify the limits of agreement between the results of the 2 methods measured on the same patient. METHODS: Adult patients presenting to the ED and requiring diagnostic workup for suspected VTE were included in this prospective observational study. Patients underwent simultaneous D-dimer measurements using the 2 different analyzers. RESULTS: The paired results from 104 patients were analyzed. The median time for the D-dimer results from triage by VIDAS was 258 min (Inter-quartile range [IQR], 173-360) and by POCT was 146 min (IQR, 55-280.5); the median time difference was 101.5 min (IQR, 82-125.5). On an average, POCT D-dimer values were 15% lower on the same sample (limits of agreement, 34-213%). POCT predicted 83% of VIDAS positive results (sensitivity, 83.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 70.4-91.3%]; specificity, 100% [95% CI, 93.6-100%]). All patients with positive imaging were identified correctly by both methods. CONCLUSIONS: POCT delivers D-dimer results in significantly shorter turnaround times than pathology services; however, poor bioequivalence between VIDAS and POCT raises the issue of acceptability for use in the ED.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3535194
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35351942013-01-08 Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study Perveen, Shuhana Unwin, Danielle Shetty, Amith Loknath Ann Lab Med Original Article BACKGROUND: D-dimer is used widely as a diagnostic aid in low- and moderate-risk patients with suspected venous thromboembolism (VTE). While our laboratory utilizes VIDAS D-dimer analyzer (bioMérieux SA, France), our emergency department (ED) recently procured a D-dimer analyzer AQT90 FLEX (Radiometer Medical ApS, Denmark) for point of care testing (POCT) to facilitate patient management. We aimed to determine whether the time taken to receive D-dimer results using the 2 different analyzers differed significantly and to quantify the limits of agreement between the results of the 2 methods measured on the same patient. METHODS: Adult patients presenting to the ED and requiring diagnostic workup for suspected VTE were included in this prospective observational study. Patients underwent simultaneous D-dimer measurements using the 2 different analyzers. RESULTS: The paired results from 104 patients were analyzed. The median time for the D-dimer results from triage by VIDAS was 258 min (Inter-quartile range [IQR], 173-360) and by POCT was 146 min (IQR, 55-280.5); the median time difference was 101.5 min (IQR, 82-125.5). On an average, POCT D-dimer values were 15% lower on the same sample (limits of agreement, 34-213%). POCT predicted 83% of VIDAS positive results (sensitivity, 83.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 70.4-91.3%]; specificity, 100% [95% CI, 93.6-100%]). All patients with positive imaging were identified correctly by both methods. CONCLUSIONS: POCT delivers D-dimer results in significantly shorter turnaround times than pathology services; however, poor bioequivalence between VIDAS and POCT raises the issue of acceptability for use in the ED. The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 2013-01 2012-12-17 /pmc/articles/PMC3535194/ /pubmed/23301220 http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2013.33.1.34 Text en © The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Perveen, Shuhana
Unwin, Danielle
Shetty, Amith Loknath
Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study
title Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study
title_full Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study
title_fullStr Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study
title_full_unstemmed Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study
title_short Point of Care D-Dimer Testing in the Emergency Department: A Bioequivalence Study
title_sort point of care d-dimer testing in the emergency department: a bioequivalence study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3535194/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23301220
http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2013.33.1.34
work_keys_str_mv AT perveenshuhana pointofcareddimertestingintheemergencydepartmentabioequivalencestudy
AT unwindanielle pointofcareddimertestingintheemergencydepartmentabioequivalencestudy
AT shettyamithloknath pointofcareddimertestingintheemergencydepartmentabioequivalencestudy