RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: This observational study conducted across seven emergency care units compares the efficacy of four D-dimer detection methods, namely HemosIL D-dimer HS (HS), HemosIL D-dimer HS-500 (HS-500), VIDAS D-dimer (VIDAS), and HemosIL AcuStar D-dimer (ACUSTAR). The primary focus is on patients with a clinical suspicion of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: A total of 149 samples were collected from patients with suspected DVT or PE. The confirmation of DVT/PE was based on calf ultrasound or computed tomography-Angiography. Direct comparisons were made between the different detection methods, considering both their analytical performance and clinical utility. Additionally, the impact of an age-adjusted cut-off on the diagnostic accuracy of each method was assessed. RESULTS: The results revealed comparable negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity across the methods, with a notable exception of increased specificity for HS compared with HS-500 (50.8% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.03). Further analysis incorporating an age-adjusted cut-off demonstrated a significant improvement in specificity for HS. When using the age-adjusted cut-off, HS exhibited a substantial increase in specificity compared with HS-500 (63.1% vs. 49.2%, p = 0.004) and demonstrated significantly higher specificity compared with VIDAS (63.1% vs. 53.8%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The study emphasizes the nonuniversal effect of an age-adjusted cut-off and discusses the potential necessity for different cut-off values, particularly in the case of HS-500. These findings contribute to the understanding of D-dimer detection methods in the context of DVT and PE, providing insights into their relative performances and the potential optimization through age-adjusted cut-offs.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Haemolysis is the leading cause of sample rejection in laboratory haemostasis. Most studies focused on artificially haemolysed samples. The aim of this study was a prospective assessment of spontaneous haemolysis on haemostasis tests, by comparing results of haemolysed (H) versus new, non-haemolysed (NH) specimens, collected within 4hrs. As new coagulometers can identify interfering substances, visual assessment of haemolysis was also compared with instrumental haemolysis index and stratified in subclasses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and sixty nine paired samples were collected and analysed using ACL TOP750-CTS (Instrumentation Laboratory, Bedford, USA), for prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), D-Dimer (DD), fibrinogen (Fib) and antithrombin (AT). Bias between H and NH was calculated and compared with the respective critical difference (CD). RESULTS: Mean bias was - 0.1 s for PT (P = 0.057), - 1.1 s for aPTT (P < 0.001), 1025 ng/mL for DD (P < 0.001), - 0.04 g/L for Fib (P = 0.258) and 1.4% for AT (P = 0.013). Bias exceeding the CD varied according to the method, with larger differences for aPTT (36.1%) and DD (17.1%) and < 8% for PT, Fib and AT. No correlation emerged between free haemoglobin values and difference in haemostasis tests in H and NH samples for any tests. Moderate/severe haemolysis involved > 95% of samples. The agreement between visual assessment and instrumental evaluation of haemolysis was 0.62. CONCLUSION: Spurious haemolysis deeply influences aPTT and DD, and to a lesser extent AT and Fib. Prothrombin time seems only slightly influenced, suggesting that PT can be accepted also in haemolysed samples. Although a good inter-observer correlation of haemolysis evaluation was found, the instrumental assessment of haemolysis seems recommendable.