Liar, Liar, Clot on Fire: Is a Negative D-Dimer Always Enough?

by | Apr 16, 2026 | 0 comments

dimer

Venous thromboembolism, which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is one of the most commonly worked-up diagnoses in the emergency department. Approximately half of all DVTs embolize to the lungs, and the annual incidence of PEs is about 1 in 1000 people. The mortality risk of missed PEs is anywhere from 5% to 30%. The recovery from DVT and PE can also lead to chronic complications such as post-thrombotic syndrome, bleeding related to anticoagulation, recurrent VTE, and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. The timely diagnosis and appropriate management and follow-up of thrombotic events is therefore extremely important.

At the same time, however, the symptoms of VTE, such as chest pain, dyspnea, or unilateral leg swelling, are nonspecific and frequently overlap with many other conditions. This is where the D-dimer can play a critical role. D-dimer helps clinicians safely exclude VTE in the right clinical context, reducing the need for imaging while maintaining a very low rate of missed diagnoses.

D-dimer also happens to be one of the most controversial tests discussed in the emergency department. We all know that D-dimers are sensitive tests, but are not particularly specific, and there are many conditions that lead to falsely elevated D-dimer, not necessarily related to an acute thrombotic event. What we do not discuss as much is the opposite scenario, where the D-dimer is negative, and whether there are situations where we may be falsely reassured by a negative D-dimer.

Here, we will highlight some of the controversies of using D-dimer, and is meant to provide everyone with a framework on the interpretation of D-dimer in some of these less commonly encountered scenarios.

For more on managing the crashing patient with PE, check out our post on RV failure in acute PE, as for the workup and management of PE in the pregnant patient click here.

Pathophysiology Review

Recall the coagulation cascade, which essentially leads to thrombin converting soluble fibrinogen to fibrin monomers. Fibrin is the end product of the common pathway and helps form the bulk of the clot. D-dimer is generated when the cross-linked fibrin network is degraded by plasmin. It is therefore released when there is formation and degradation of cross-linked fibrin, so it provides a global marker of activation of the coagulation and fibrinolytic systems.

D-dimer basically tells us fibrin was formed and broken down, making it an indirect marker of thrombotic activity and clot formation or turnover.

dimer

Scenario 1: High-pretest Probability

You have a 55 year-old female who presents to the emergency department with pleuritic chest pain and dyspnea on exertion. She has had progressive swelling and pain in the right leg for the last week. Her vitals are as follows: HR 110, T 36.5, BP 126/87, SpO₂ 95% on room air, RR 18. You see that a D-dimer was sent from triage and it is <500. Can we stop there and safely rule out PE in this patient?

This scenario brings us to a discussion on pre-test probability. When evaluating for PE or DVT, the clinical pre-test probability is a critical factor in how much we can trust a negative D-dimer. The most commonly used tool in the emergency department is the Wells score, which either categorizes patients into low, intermediate, or high risk, or the simplified version which categorizes patients into “PE unlikely” or “PE likely” groups. The original Wells study, and studies that have since validated it, showed that the proportion of patients with confirmed PE is approximately 12% in the “PE unlikely” group, and about 50% in the “PE likely” category.

Current guidelines state that the safety of D-dimer-based exclusion strategies is established only in low- and intermediate-risk patients, not in those with high pre-test probability. The main guidelines for diagnosing VTE events, including those published by the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Society of Hematology, Thrombosis Canada, and the American College of Physicians, all recommend that in a high pre-test probability group, we should not be relying on a negative D-dimer alone. These patients should get diagnostic imaging, either in the form of a Doppler ultrasound or a CTPA.

Remember the difference between sensitivity and negative predictive value. Sensitivity is the ability of a test to correctly identify patients who have the disease in question. On the other hand, negative predictive value is the proportion of patients with a negative test who truly do not have the disease. The key difference is that NPV depends on disease prevalence in your population of interest. If the disease is common, NPV drops, even if sensitivity is high.

When the prevalence of DVT or PE increases in a particular patient population, the negative predictive value of D-dimer decreases. In these scenarios, whether you are using a standard cutoff of 500 or an age-adjusted cutoff, the NPV of D-dimer decreases and still leaves a significant probability of VTE, making this test unreliable in the high pre-test probability group.

The International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH) recommends that a diagnostic strategy for ruling out PE or DVT can be considered safe if the 3-month risk of VTE after a negative diagnostic workup is less than 2%. In patients with a low pre-test probability, the negative predictive value of D-dimer is about 99%. In patients with a high pre-test probability, and therefore a prevalence of PE or DVT of 50% or higher, the negative predictive value drops to 88% to 92%. This leaves a significant miss rate, which is much higher than the accepted 2% failure rate.

Bottom line: in high pre-test probability patients, since the prevalence of disease is significantly higher, we should be imaging directly, as a negative D-dimer does not have a high enough negative predictive value to rule out PE.

Scenario 2: Patients on Anticoagulation

A 67-year-old male with a history of atrial fibrillation on apixaban 5 mg BID presents to the ED with dyspnea that started 2 days ago. This is associated with pleuritic chest pain, and he is slightly hypoxic on your assessment. His D-dimer is <500. Can we stop there and safely rule out PE in this patient?

The most well-known and commonly used clinical decision scores available to us in the ED include the Wells score for DVT and PE, the YEARS algorithm, and age-adjusted criteria. Patients receiving anticoagulation have universally been excluded from the studies assessing the diagnostic value of D-dimer in patients presenting with clinically suspected VTE. This is mainly due to early, indirect evidence that patients on anticoagulation show a reduced capacity for thrombin generation, and consequently D-dimer formation. Some early, small studies showed that D-dimer levels drop or normalize once anticoagulation is started, and have higher levels again once anticoagulation is withdrawn.

One small study that included 70 patients who presented with suspected DVT, who were already on full-dose anticoagulation, found a sensitivity of D-dimer of only 69.2%. Similarly, a retrospective cohort study looked at 704 outpatients suspected of having DVT, who underwent D-dimer testing and ultrasound. They did a subgroup analysis calculating the performance of D-dimer in patients using anticoagulants (n = 61), compared to a reference group. They calculated an overall D-dimer sensitivity of only 75% in patients using oral anticoagulants, compared to a sensitivity of 99% in the remaining patients in their reference group.

All of the data available on this patient subgroup is of relatively low quality and difficult to translate to clinical practice. In terms of guideline-based recommendations, the ASH guidelines state that there is limited data on the utility of D-dimer for patients receiving anticoagulant therapy, and later note that the effect of anticoagulation on D-dimer test results is uncertain at best. Another recent review on best practices in the diagnosis and management of VTE states that D-dimer levels can be normal in those on anticoagulants and therefore should not be used to exclude VTE in this scenario.

In discussion with local thrombosis experts at The Ottawa Hospital, the overall recommendation is that, until we have more convincing data, we should be very cautious using D-dimer in patients who are anticoagulated. Overall, it is recommended against using D-dimer in this population.

Bottom line: until we have more data showing its utility in patients who are anticoagulated, D-dimer is not a reliable exclusion test in this population.

Scenario 3: Recurrent VTE

You have a 75 year-old female with a history of DVT a few years ago, no longer on anticoagulation, who presents with recurrent symptoms of DVT. How reliable is a negative D-dimer in this clinical scenario?

The value of D-dimer has not been as well evaluated in patients with suspected recurrent DVT. Many validation studies of the most common algorithms we use in the ED excluded patients with prior VTE.

In the guidelines published by the American College of Chest Physicians, they state that although the evidence is not as robust, D-dimer levels appear to be reliable in ruling out recurrent VTE events based on a few studies that have shown similar sensitivities and negative predictive values of D-dimer compared to patients with a first presentation of possible VTE.

Bottom line: based on somewhat limited data, a negative D-dimer is likely reliable to use in suspected recurrent PE or DVT.

Scenario 4: Prolonged Symptoms

You have a 45 year-old female who presents to the emergency department with leg swelling that has been ongoing for about a month. You are suspicious of a DVT on exam. Her D-dimer is <500.

In this section, we will review the evidence of D-dimer utility in cases of more prolonged or subacute symptoms. The Wells score, YEARS criteria, and age-adjusted D-dimer have primarily included patients presenting with acute symptoms, although they did not always clearly define what “acute” meant. These studies have not specifically stratified patients by symptom duration beyond the acute phase, and delayed presentations are generally underrepresented or excluded in validation studies. This is important, since the sensitivity of D-dimer for ruling out VTE may decrease as symptom duration increases due to declining fibrinolytic activity and lower circulating D-dimer levels over time.

Multiple studies have looked at this question, and the data is somewhat conflicting. Based on current evidence and expert opinion, it is safe to use D-dimer in the acute phase of patients presenting within 7 days of symptoms, but we should be more cautious using D-dimer as an exclusion test if symptoms have been prolonged, especially if longer than 14 days.

Bottom line: D-dimer has been validated in the acute phase of symptoms if they are ongoing for less than 7 days. There is no data to support the use of D-dimer beyond 14 days, and some data suggest it is unreliable with higher false negative rates.

Scenario 5: Patient’s with Cancer

You have a 64 year-old male with metastatic melanoma who presents with 3 days of generalized weakness, cough, dyspnea, and poor oral intake. His vital signs are a heart rate of 105, respiratory rate of 20, temperature of 37.8, BP 135/78, and oxygen saturation of 94% on room air. You suspect he might have pneumonia, and based on the Wells score, he has an unlikely pre-test probability for PE, a D-dimer was added on and is negative.

In this section, we will review the evidence of using D-dimer in cancer patients. There has been quite a lot of controversy over the use of D-dimer in this population, particularly because many patients with cancer will have elevated D-dimers as a consequence of their underlying disease, but also because the risk of thrombotic events in this group is substantially higher compared to patients without cancer. Some clinicians may feel that patients with active cancer are automatically in the high pre-test probability group because of their malignancy, and therefore imaging should be performed directly.

There have been many studies over the last 20 years that have sought to answer this question, and most have found high sensitivity greater than 95% and high negative predictive value ranging from 98% to 100% in patients with cancer, similar to those without cancer. A recent meta-analysis found an overall sensitivity of D-dimer of approximately 96%.

There is additional nuance in studying this population. The typical accepted 2% failure rate is based on detection of VTE within 3 months. Some studies have shown a slightly higher failure rate in patients with cancer, but it is unclear whether this represents true diagnostic failure or new clot formation given their higher baseline risk.

Local thrombosis experts at The Ottawa Hospital suggest that using D-dimer in a patient with cancer is a safe exclusionary test if there is an unlikely pre-test probability. However, they recommend against using age-adjusted D-dimer in this population until higher-quality evidence is available.

Bottom line: the sensitivity and negative predictive value of D-dimer appear to be similarly high in cancer patients compared to non-cancer patients, but this must be combined with clinical decision rules. It is reasonable to use a standard cutoff of 500 rather than an age-adjusted cutoff.

A Brief Comment on Clots in More Unusual Locations

There is much less evidence regarding the use of D-dimer in upper extremity DVT, and it is unclear how much can be extrapolated from lower extremity DVT research. Upper extremity DVT is more commonly secondary to central venous catheters, pacemaker wires, or malignancy.

The American Society of Hematology guidelines recommend a similar approach to lower extremity DVT. Start with pre-test probability and use D-dimer only in the unlikely group. A negative D-dimer combined with low pre-test probability is sufficient to rule out upper extremity DVT. In higher-risk patients, proceed directly to ultrasound.

For clots in more unusual locations such as CVST, splanchnic vein thrombosis, ovarian vein thrombosis, or superficial venous thrombosis, D-dimer does not have sufficient sensitivity to rule these out. There are no validated diagnostic algorithms for these conditions.

Bottom line: D-dimer should not be used to rule out clots in unusual locations. Imaging is required.

 

Summary & Take Home Points

 

  • Remember that in your high pre-test probability patient based on your clinical decision rules, a negative d-dimer does not have the negative predictive value we are looking for to rule out an acute thrombotic event. 
  • Patients who are already anticoagulated have not been well studied and have historically been excluded from all the algorithms we use when it comes to d-dimer, and the small bit of poor quality evidence we have tells us that a negative d-dimer might not have the sensitivity and NPV we are looking for if you are highly suspicious of a breakthrough clot. 
  • D-dimer appears to be reliable in ruling out suspected recurrent clots. 
  • Diagnostic algorithms using d-dimer have been validated in patients with acute symptoms. There remains controversy about what “acute” actually is referring to – expert consensus is under 7 days it is safe to use d-dimer, there is questionable evidence about using d-dimer between 7-14 days, and we should probably not be using d-dimer if symptoms have been ongoing for longer than 14 days. 
  • Most evidence indicates d-dimer is effective at ruling out an acute thrombotic event in patients with cancer.

 

 

References

  1. Weitz JI, Fredenburgh JC, Eikelboom JW. A Test in Context: D-Dimer. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(19):2411-2420. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.09.024
  2. Carrier M, Lee AYY, Bates SM, Anderson DR, Wells PS. Accuracy and usefulness of a clinical prediction rule and D-dimer testing in excluding deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients. Thromb Res. 2008;123(1):177-183. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2008.05.002
  3. 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. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.2135
  4. Sartori M, Borgese L, Favaretto E, Lasala E, Bortolotti R, Cosmi B. Age-adjusted D-dimer, clinical pre-test probability-adjusted D-dimer, and whole leg ultrasound in ruling out suspected proximal and calf deep venous thrombosis. Am J Hematol. 2023;98(11):1772-1779. doi:10.1002/ajh.27077
  5. Lim W, Le Gal G, Bates SM, et al. American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: diagnosis of venous thromboembolism. Blood Adv. 2018;2(22):3226-3256. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2018024828
  6. Kearon C, Akl EA, Comerota AJ, et al. Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e419S-e494S. doi:10.1378/chest.11-2301
  7. Stevens SM, Woller SC, Kreuziger LB, et al. Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: Second Update of the CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report. CHEST. 2021;160(6):e545-e608. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2021.07.055
  8. Cox C, Roberts LN. Basics of diagnosis and treatment of venous thromboembolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2025;23(4):1185-1202. doi:10.1016/j.jtha.2025.01.009
  9. Koch V, Martin SS, Gruber-Rouh T, et al. Cancer patients with venous thromboembolism: Diagnostic and prognostic value of elevated D-dimers. Eur J Clin Invest. 2023;53(4):e13914. doi:10.1111/eci.13914
  10. Wolf SJ, Hahn SA, Nentwich LM, Raja AS, Silvers SM, Brown MD. Clinical Policy: Critical Issues in the Evaluation and Management of Adult Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Suspected Acute Venous Thromboembolic Disease. Ann Emerg Med. 2018;71(5):e59-e109. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.03.006
  11. Righini M, Gal GL, Lucia SD, et al. Clinical usefulness of D-dimer testing in cancer patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 2017;95:715-719. doi:10.1160/TH05-12-0791
  12. Lee AYY, Julian JA, Levine MN, et al. Clinical Utility of a Rapid Whole-Blood d-Dimer Assay in Patients with Cancer Who Present with Suspected Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131(6):417-423. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-131-6-199909210-00004
  13. Langlois E, Cusson‐Dufour C, Moumneh T, et al. Could the YEARS algorithm be used to exclude pulmonary embolism during pregnancy? Data from the CT‐PE‐pregnancy study. J Thromb Haemost. 2019;17(8):1329-1334. doi:10.1111/jth.14483
  14. Allaham H, Mansour A, Abdullah O, Danila C. D dimer sensitivity in fully anticoagulated patients with moderate pretest probability for pulmonary thromboembolism. JACC. 2019;73(9_Supplement_1):2168-2168. doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(19)32774-3
  15. Keller K, Beule J, Balzer JO, Dippold W. D-Dimer and thrombus burden in acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Emerg Med. 2018;36(9):1613-1618. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2018.01.048
  16. Tripodi A, Capecchi M, Scalambrino E, et al. D-dimer for patients on VKA vs DOAC: impact on the validity of D-dimer to make decision for extended anticoagulation. Blood Adv. 2024;8(14):3612-3614. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2024013193
  17. Sartori M, Migliaccio L, Favaretto E, et al. D-dimer for the diagnosis of upper extremity deep and superficial venous thrombosis. Thromb Res. 2015;135(4):673-678. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2015.02.007
  18. Legnani C, Martinelli I, Palareti G, et al. D-dimer levels during and after anticoagulation withdrawal in patients with venous thromboembolism treated with non-vitamin K anticoagulants. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(7):e0219751. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0219751
  19. Singer AJ, Zheng H, Francis S, et al. D-dimer levels in VTE patients with distal and proximal clots. Am J Emerg Med. 2019;37(1):33-37. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2018.04.040
  20. Steinbrecher O, Šinkovec H, Eischer L, Kyrle PA, Eichinger S. D-dimer levels over time after anticoagulation and the association with recurrent venous thromboembolism. Thromb Res. 2021;197:160-164. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2020.11.015
  21. Di Nisio M, Sohne M, Kamphuisen PW, Büller HR. D-Dimer test in cancer patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2005;3(6):1239-1242. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2005.01323.x
  22. Couturaud F, Kearon C, Bates SM, Ginsberg JS. Decrease in sensitivity of D-dimer for acute venous thromboembolism after starting anticoagulant therapy. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2002;13(3):241.
  23. Kesieme E, Kesieme C, Jebbin N, Irekpita E, Dongo A. Deep vein thrombosis: a clinical review. J Blood Med. 2011;2:59-69. doi:10.2147/JBM.S19009
  24. Heit JA, Minor TA, Andrews JC, Larson DR, Li H, Nichols WL. Determinants of Plasma Fibrin D-Dimer Sensitivity for Acute Pulmonary Embolism as Defined by Pulmonary Angiography. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999;123(3):235-240. doi:10.5858/1999-123-0235-DOPFDD
  25. Chopard R, Albertsen IE, Piazza G. Diagnosis and Treatment of Lower Extremity Venous Thromboembolism: A Review. JAMA. 2020;324(17):1765-1776. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.17272
  26. Patel P, Braun C, Patel P, et al. Diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis of the upper extremity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy. Blood Adv. 2020;4(11):2516-2522. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2019001409
  27. Bates SM, Jaeschke R, Stevens SM, et al. Diagnosis of DVT. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e351S-e418S. doi:10.1378/chest.11-2299
  28. Kearon C. Diagnosis of suspected venous thromboembolism. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2016;2016(1):397-403. doi:10.1182/asheducation-2016.1.397
  29. De Wit K, Parpia S, Sunavsky A, Ilic A, Germini F, Carney BJ. Diagnostic Accuracy of D-Dimer for Pulmonary Embolism and Lower Limb Deep Vein Thrombosis Testing in People with Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Blood. 2021;138:3218. doi:10.1182/blood-2021-153228
  30. Riva N, Attard LM, Vella K, Squizzato A, Gatt A, Calleja-Agius J. Diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer in patients at high-risk for splanchnic vein thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Res. 2021;207:102-112. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2021.09.016
  31. Bosch FTM, Nisio MD, Büller HR, van Es N. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis. J Clin Med. 2020;9(7):2069. doi:10.3390/jcm9072069
  32. Mos ICM, Douma RA, Erkens PMG, et al. Diagnostic outcome management study in patients with clinically suspected recurrent acute pulmonary embolism with a structured algorithm. Thromb Res. 2014;133(6):1039-1044. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2014.03.050
  33. Aguilar C, del Villar V. Diagnostic value of D-dimer in outpatients with suspected deep venous thrombosis receiving oral anticoagulation. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2007;18(3):253. doi:10.1097/MBC.0b013e32808738c5
  34. Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, et al. Evaluation of D-Dimer in the Diagnosis of Suspected Deep-Vein Thrombosis. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(13):1227-1235. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa023153
  35. Raja AS, Greenberg JO, Qaseem A, et al. Evaluation of Patients With Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Best Practice Advice From the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(9):701-711. doi:10.7326/M14-1772
  36. Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, et al. Excluding Pulmonary Embolism at the Bedside without Diagnostic Imaging: Management of Patients with Suspected Pulmonary Embolism Presenting to the Emergency Department by Using a Simple Clinical Model and d-dimer. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135(2):98-107. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-135-2-200107170-00010
  37. Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, et al. Excluding Pulmonary Embolism at the Bedside without Diagnostic Imaging: Management of Patients with Suspected Pulmonary Embolism Presenting to the Emergency Department by Using a Simple Clinical Model and d-dimer. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135(2):98-107. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-135-2-200107170-00010
  38. Geersing GJ, Zuithoff NPA, Kearon C, et al. Exclusion of deep vein thrombosis using the Wells rule in clinically important subgroups: individual patient data meta-analysis. The BMJ. 2014;348:g1340. doi:10.1136/bmj.g1340
  39. Robert-Ebadi H, Roy PM, Sanchez O, Verschuren F, Le Gal G, Righini M. External validation of the PEGeD diagnostic algorithm for suspected pulmonary embolism in an independent cohort. Blood Adv. 2022;7(15):3946-3951. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2022007729
  40. Eddy M, Robert‐Ebadi H, Richardson L, et al. External validation of the YEARS diagnostic algorithm for suspected pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(12):3289-3295. doi:10.1111/jth.15083
  41. den Exter PL, van Es J, Erkens PMG, et al. Impact of Delay in Clinical Presentation on the Diagnostic Management and Prognosis of Patients with Suspected Pulmonary Embolism. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;187(12):1369-1373. doi:10.1164/rccm.201212-2219OC
  42. Reda S, Thiele Serra E, Müller J, et al. Increased Prevalence of Elevated D-Dimer Levels in Patients on Direct Oral Anticoagulants: Results of a Large Retrospective Study. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:830010. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.830010
  43. Dave HM, Khorana AA. Management of venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer. Cleve Clin J Med. 2024;91(2):109-117. doi:10.3949/ccjm.91a.23017
  44. Rathbun SW, Whitsett TL, Raskob GE. Negative d-Dimer Result To Exclude Recurrent Deep Venous Thrombosis: A Management Trial. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(11):839-845. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-141-11-200412070-00007
  45. Jennersjö CM, Fagerberg IH, Karlander SG, Lindahl TL. Normal D-dimer concentration is a common finding in symptomatic outpatients with distal deep vein thrombosis. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 2005;16(7):517. doi:10.1097/01.mbc.0000187649.29204.f3
  46. Valls MJF, Hulle T van der, Exter PL den, Mos ICM, Huisman MV, Klok FA. Performance of a diagnostic algorithm based on a prediction rule, D-dimer and CT-scan for pulmonary embolism in patients with previous venous thromboembolism. Thromb Haemost. 2017;114:406-413. doi:10.1160/TH14-06-0488
  47. Mai V, Martens ESL, Righini M, et al. Performance of clinical decision rules in patients presenting with suspected recurrent venous thromboembolism: a multicenter prospective cohort study. J Thromb Haemost. Published online June 25, 2025. doi:10.1016/j.jtha.2025.06.019
  48. Kelly J, Rudd A, Lewis RR, Hunt BJ. Plasma D-Dimers in the Diagnosis of Venous Thromboembolism. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(7):747-756. doi:10.1001/archinte.162.7.747
  49. Qdaisat A, Soud RA, Wu CC, et al. Poor performance of D-dimer in excluding venous thromboembolism among patients with lymphoma and leukemia. Haematologica. 2019;104(6):e265-e268. doi:10.3324/haematol.2018.211466
  50. Ordieres-Ortega L, Demelo-Rodríguez P, Galeano-Valle F, Kremers BMM, ten Cate-Hoek AJ, ten Cate H. Predictive value of D-dimer testing for the diagnosis of venous thrombosis in unusual locations: A systematic review. Thromb Res. 2020;189:5-12. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2020.02.009
  51. Kahn SR, Wit K de. Pulmonary Embolism. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(1):45-57. doi:10.1056/NEJMcp2116489
  52. Frost SD, Brotman DJ, Michota FA. Rational Use of D-Dimer Measurement to Exclude Acute Venous Thromboembolic Disease. Mayo Clin Proc. 2003;78(11):1385-1391. doi:10.4065/78.11.1385
  53. Le Gal G, Kovacs MJ, Bertoletti L, et al. Risk for Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism Managed Without Anticoagulation. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175(1):29-35. doi:10.7326/M21-2981
  54. Stals MAM, Takada T, Kraaijpoel N, et al. Safety and Efficiency of Diagnostic Strategies for Ruling Out Pulmonary Embolism in Clinically Relevant Patient Subgroups. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175(2):244-255. doi:10.7326/M21-2625
  55. Kleinjan A, Di Nisio M, Beyer-Westendorf J, et al. Safety and Feasibility of a Diagnostic Algorithm Combining Clinical Probability, d-Dimer Testing, and Ultrasonography for Suspected Upper Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(7):451-457. doi:10.7326/M13-2056
  56. Verhovsek M, Douketis JD, Yi Q, et al. Systematic Review: d-Dimer to Predict Recurrent Disease after Stopping Anticoagulant Therapy for Unprovoked Venous Thromboembolism. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(7):481-490. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-149-7-200810070-00008
  57. The Clinical Usefulness of D-Dimer Testing in Cancer Patients With Suspected Deep Venous Thrombosis | Oncology | JAMA Internal Medicine | JAMA Network. Accessed August 5, 2025. https://jamanetwork-com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/212662
  58. Goldin Y, Pasvolsky O, Rogowski O, et al. The diagnostic yield of D-Dimer in relation to time from symptom onset in patients evaluated for venous thromboembolism in the emergency medicine department. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2011;31(1):1-5. doi:10.1007/s11239-010-0480-6
  59. Mohamad H, Fronas SG, Jørgensen CT, Tavoly M, Garabet L, Ghanima W. The effect of rivaroxaban on the diagnostic value of D-dimer in patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Res. 2022;216:22-24. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2022.05.017
  60. Bruinstroop E, van de Ree MA, Huisman MV. The use of D-dimer in specific clinical conditions: A narrative review. Eur J Intern Med. 2009;20(5):441-446. doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2008.12.004
  61. Cosmi B, Legnani C, Cini M, et al. Thrombotic burden, D-dimer levels and complete compression ultrasound for diagnosis of acute symptomatic deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs. Thromb Res. 2022;213:163-169. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2022.03.019
  62. Peterson EA, Lee AYY. Update from the clinic: what’s new in the diagnosis of cancer-associated thrombosis? Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2019;2019(1):167-174. doi:10.1182/hematology.2019000024
  63. Schutgens REG, Esseboom EU, Haas FJLM, Nieuwenhuis HK, Biesma DH. Usefulness of a semiquantitative D-dimer test for the exclusion of deep venous thrombosis in outpatients. Am J Med. 2002;112(8):617-621. doi:10.1016/S0002-9343(02)01115-4
  64. Le Gal G, Righini M, Roy PM, et al. Value of D-Dimer Testing for the Exclusion of Pulmonary Embolism in Patients With Previous Venous Thromboembolism. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(2):176-180. doi:10.1001/archinte.166.2.176
  65. van Es N, van der Hulle T, van Es J, et al. Wells Rule and d-Dimer Testing to Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(4):253-261. doi:10.7326/M16-0031

Author

Submit a Comment

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

Subscribe to get updated on our latest posts!

 

No spam! Just one email a week 

You have Successfully Subscribed!