Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of three D-dimer assays in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis: STA-Liatest D-Di plus, Tina-quant D-dimer Gen. 2, and INNOVANCE D-dimer

Q4 Medicine Thrombosis Update Pub Date : 2023-08-26 DOI:10.1016/j.tru.2023.100147
Brita Tonne (Brita Tønne) , Marit Holmefjord Pedersen , Synne G. Fronas , Camilla Tovik Jorgensen (Camilla Tøvik Jørgensen) , Erik Koldberg Amundsen , Julie Berge Maehlum (Julie Berge Mæhlum) , Thea Berg , Aase-Berit Mathisen (Åse-Berit Mathisen) , Waleed Ghanima , Lamya Garabet
{"title":"Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of three D-dimer assays in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis: STA-Liatest D-Di plus, Tina-quant D-dimer Gen. 2, and INNOVANCE D-dimer","authors":"Brita Tonne (Brita Tønne) ,&nbsp;Marit Holmefjord Pedersen ,&nbsp;Synne G. Fronas ,&nbsp;Camilla Tovik Jorgensen (Camilla Tøvik Jørgensen) ,&nbsp;Erik Koldberg Amundsen ,&nbsp;Julie Berge Maehlum (Julie Berge Mæhlum) ,&nbsp;Thea Berg ,&nbsp;Aase-Berit Mathisen (Åse-Berit Mathisen) ,&nbsp;Waleed Ghanima ,&nbsp;Lamya Garabet","doi":"10.1016/j.tru.2023.100147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>D-dimer is a crucial test to exclude deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We aimed to evaluate the performance of three D-dimer assays: STA-Liatest D-Di Plus (Diagnostica Stago), Tina-quant D-Dimer Gen. 2 (Roche Diagnostics), and INNOVANCE D-Dimer (Siemens Healthineers Diagnostics) in the exclusion of DVT.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Samples (n = 1032) and clinical data were acquired from a prospective outcome study (Rivaroxaban for Scheduled Work-up of Deep Vein Thrombosis – the Ri-Schedule study), which included patients referred to the emergency department with suspected lower-limb DVT. D-dimer was determined with STA-Liatest, and only patients with positive D-dimer values (≥0.5 μg/mL) as stand-alone, were referred for compression ultrasonography to confirm or exclude DVT. Patients were followed up 90 days after inclusion. Samples were also analyzed with Tina-quant Gen. 2, and INNOVANCE assays. The diagnostic performances of the three assays were investigated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Positive D-dimer (≥0.5 μg/mL) was found in 733 patients (71%) with STA-Liatest, 691 patients (67%) with Tina-quant Gen. 2, and 766 (74%) with INNOVANCE. DVT was confirmed by compression ultrasonography in 196 patients (27%) with positive D-dimer with STA-Liatest. Of those, six (3%) had negative D-dimer (&lt;0.5 μg/mL) with at least one of the three assays yielding a failure rate of 0.7% with STA-Liatest, 2% with Tina-quant Gen. 2, and 2% with INNOVANCE. The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) for STA-Liatest were 99.0% (95% CI 96.4–99.9) and 99.3% (95% CI 97.4–99.8), for Tina-quant Gen. 2 97.5% (95% CI 94.1–99.2) and 98.5% (95% CI 96.6–99.4), and for INNOVANCE 98.0% (95% CI 94.9–99.0) and 98.5% (95% CI 96.1–99.4) respectively. The efficiency to exclude DVT based on D-dimer as a stand-alone test was 29% (95% CI 26–33) for STA-Liatest, 33% (95% CI 30–37) for Tina-quant Gen. 2, and 26% (95% CI 23–29) for INNOVANCE.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>STA-Liatest, Tina-quant Gen. 2, and INNOVANCE showed good performances with sensitivity ≥97% and NPV ≥98%. The efficiency to exclude DVT varied and was highest for Tina-quant Gen. 2, whereas the failure rate was lowest for STA-Liatest.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34401,"journal":{"name":"Thrombosis Update","volume":"13 ","pages":"Article 100147"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thrombosis Update","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666572723000184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

D-dimer is a crucial test to exclude deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We aimed to evaluate the performance of three D-dimer assays: STA-Liatest D-Di Plus (Diagnostica Stago), Tina-quant D-Dimer Gen. 2 (Roche Diagnostics), and INNOVANCE D-Dimer (Siemens Healthineers Diagnostics) in the exclusion of DVT.

Methods

Samples (n = 1032) and clinical data were acquired from a prospective outcome study (Rivaroxaban for Scheduled Work-up of Deep Vein Thrombosis – the Ri-Schedule study), which included patients referred to the emergency department with suspected lower-limb DVT. D-dimer was determined with STA-Liatest, and only patients with positive D-dimer values (≥0.5 μg/mL) as stand-alone, were referred for compression ultrasonography to confirm or exclude DVT. Patients were followed up 90 days after inclusion. Samples were also analyzed with Tina-quant Gen. 2, and INNOVANCE assays. The diagnostic performances of the three assays were investigated.

Results

Positive D-dimer (≥0.5 μg/mL) was found in 733 patients (71%) with STA-Liatest, 691 patients (67%) with Tina-quant Gen. 2, and 766 (74%) with INNOVANCE. DVT was confirmed by compression ultrasonography in 196 patients (27%) with positive D-dimer with STA-Liatest. Of those, six (3%) had negative D-dimer (<0.5 μg/mL) with at least one of the three assays yielding a failure rate of 0.7% with STA-Liatest, 2% with Tina-quant Gen. 2, and 2% with INNOVANCE. The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) for STA-Liatest were 99.0% (95% CI 96.4–99.9) and 99.3% (95% CI 97.4–99.8), for Tina-quant Gen. 2 97.5% (95% CI 94.1–99.2) and 98.5% (95% CI 96.6–99.4), and for INNOVANCE 98.0% (95% CI 94.9–99.0) and 98.5% (95% CI 96.1–99.4) respectively. The efficiency to exclude DVT based on D-dimer as a stand-alone test was 29% (95% CI 26–33) for STA-Liatest, 33% (95% CI 30–37) for Tina-quant Gen. 2, and 26% (95% CI 23–29) for INNOVANCE.

Conclusion

STA-Liatest, Tina-quant Gen. 2, and INNOVANCE showed good performances with sensitivity ≥97% and NPV ≥98%. The efficiency to exclude DVT varied and was highest for Tina-quant Gen. 2, whereas the failure rate was lowest for STA-Liatest.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
三种D-二聚体检测对疑似深静脉血栓形成患者的诊断性能评估:STA Liatest D-Di-plus、Tina quant D-二聚物Gen.2和INNOVANCE D-二聚器
引言D二聚体是排除深静脉血栓形成(DVT)的关键测试。我们旨在评估三种D-二聚体测定的性能:STA Liatest D-Di Plus(Diagnostica Stago)、Tina quant D-dimer Gen.2(Roche Diagnostics)、,和INNOVANCE D-二聚体(西门子Healthineers Diagnostics)排除DVT。方法从一项前瞻性结果研究(利伐沙班用于深静脉血栓形成的计划治疗-Ri计划研究)中获得样本(n=1032)和临床数据,该研究包括疑似下肢DVT的急诊患者。用STA Liatest测定D-二聚体,只有D-二聚物值阳性(≥0.5μg/mL)的患者单独接受压缩超声检查以确认或排除DVT。患者在入选后90天进行随访。样品还用Tina quant Gen.2和INNOVANCE分析法进行了分析。研究了三种检测方法的诊断性能。结果STA阳性733例(71%),Tina quant Gen.2阳性691例(67%),INNOVANCE阳性766例(74%)。196例(27%)STA-Liatest阳性D-二聚体患者经压缩超声证实DVT。其中,6例(3%)D-二聚体呈阴性(<0.5μg/mL),三种检测中至少有一种STA Liatest的失败率为0.7%,Tina quant Gen.2的失败率是2%,INNOVANCE的失败率则是2%。STA Liatest的敏感性和阴性预测值(NPV)分别为99.0%(95%CI 96.4-99.9)和99.3%(95%CI 97.4-99.8。将基于D-二聚体的DVT作为一项独立测试排除在外的效率,STA-Liatest为29%(95%CI 26-33),Tina quant Gen.2为33%(95%CI 30-37),INNOVANCE为26%(95%CI 23-29)。排除DVT的效率各不相同,Tina quant Gen.2的效率最高,而STA Liatest的失败率最低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Thrombosis Update
Thrombosis Update Medicine-Hematology
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
86 days
期刊最新文献
Prothrombin concentrations in middle-aged men and women – stability over time and correlations with cardiovascular risk factors Geriatric characteristics and outcomes of older patients diagnosed with acute pulmonary embolism in the emergency department A scoping review protocol on active drug monitoring of direct oral anticoagulants on vulnerable patient groups to detect potential adverse risks Sex differences in clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes in patients with venous thromboembolism in the direct oral anticoagulant era: Insight from the COMMAND VTE Registry-2 Anticoagulation in renal impairment: Indications, clinical profiles, and complications from a colombian high-complexity hospital
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1