Superior Predictive Value of D-Dimer to the Padua Prediction Score for Venous Thromboembolism in Inpatients with AECOPD: A Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: The optimal tool for risk prediction of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in inpatients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is still unknown. This study aimed to evaluate whether D-dimer could predict the risk of VTE in inpatients with AECOPD compared to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhou, Chen, Guang, Yujie, Luo, Yuanming, Ge, Huiqing, Wei, Hailong, Liu, Huiguo, Zhang, Jianchu, Pan, Pinhua, Zhang, Jiarui, Peng, Lige, Aili, Adila, Liu, Yu, Pu, Jiaqi, Zhong, Xia, Wang, Yixi, Yi, Qun, Zhou, Haixia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Original Research
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9595060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36304969
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S380418
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The optimal tool for risk prediction of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in inpatients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is still unknown. This study aimed to evaluate whether D-dimer could predict the risk of VTE in inpatients with AECOPD compared to the Padua Prediction Score (PPS). METHODS: Inpatients with AECOPD were prospectively enrolled from seven medical centers in China between December 2018 and June 2020. On admission, D-dimer was detected, PPS was calculated for each patient, and the incidence of 2-month VTE was investigated. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the predictive value of D-dimer and PPS on VTE development, and the best cut-off value for both methods was evaluated through the Youden index. RESULTS: Among the 4468 eligible patients with AECOPD, 90 patients (2.01%) developed VTE within 2 months after admission. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) of D-dimer for predicting VTE were significantly higher than those of the PPS both in the overall cohort (0.724, 95% CI 0.672–0.776 vs 0.620, 95% CI 0.562–0.679; P<0.05) and the subgroup of patients without thromboprophylaxis (0.747, 95% CI 0.695–0.799 vs 0.640, 95% CI 0.582–0.698; P<0.05). By calculating the Youden Index, the best cut-off value of D-dimer was determined to be 0.96 mg/L with an AUC of 0.689, which was also significantly better than that of the PPS with the best cut-off value of 2 (AUC 0.581, P=0.007). After the combination of D-dimer with PPS, the AUC (0.621) failed to surpass D-dimer alone (P=0.104). CONCLUSION: D-dimer has a superior predictive value for VTE over PPS in inpatients with AECOPD, which might be a better choice to guide thromboprophylaxis in inpatients with AECOPD due to its effectiveness and convenience. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trail Registry NO. ChiCTR2100044625; URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=121626.

Ejemplares similares