The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Age-Adjusted D-Dimer Cutoff Levels to Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism: The ADJUST-PE Study
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: D-dimer measurement is an important step in the diagnostic strategy of clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE), but its clinical usefulness is limited in elderly patients. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively validate whether an age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff, defined as age × 10 in patients 50 years or older, is associated with an increased diagnostic yield of D-dimer in elderly patients with suspected PE. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PATIENTS: A multicenter, multinational, prospective management outcome study in 19 centers in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and Switzerland between January 1, 2010, and February 28, 2013. INTERVENTIONS: All consecutive outpatients who presented to the emergency department with clinically suspected PE were assessed by a sequential diagnostic strategy based on the clinical probability assessed using either the simplified, revised Geneva score or the 2-level Wells score for PE; highly sensitive D-dimer measurement; and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Patients with a D-dimer value between the conventional cutoff of 500 µg/L and their age-adjusted cutoff did not undergo CTPA and were left untreated and formally followed-up for a 3-month period. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the failure rate of the diagnostic strategy, defined as adjudicated thromboembolic events during the 3-month follow-up period among patients not treated with anticoagulants on the basis of a negative age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff result. RESULTS: Of the 3346 patients with suspected PE included, the prevalence of PE was 19%. Among the 2898 patients with a nonhigh or an unlikely clinical probability, 817 patients (28.2%) had a D-dimer level lower than 500 µg/L (95% CI, 26.6%-29.9%) and 337 patients (11.6%) had a D-dimer between 500 µg/L and their age-adjusted cutoff (95% CI, 10.5%-12.9%). The 3-month failure rate in patients with a D-dimer level higher than 500 µg/L but below the age-adjusted cutoff was 1 of 331 patients (0.3% [95% CI, 0.1%-1.7%]). Among the 766 patients 75 years or older, of whom 673 had a nonhigh clinical probability, using the age-adjusted cutoff instead of the 500 µg/L cutoff increased the proportion of patients in whom PE could be excluded on the basis of D-dimer from 43 of 673 patients (6.4% [95% CI, 4.8%-8.5%) to 200 of 673 patients (29.7% [95% CI, 26.4%-33.3%), without any additional false-negative findings. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Compared with a fixed D-dimer cutoff of 500 µg/L, the combination of pretest clinical probability assessment with age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff was associated with a larger number of patients in whom PE could be considered ruled out with a low likelihood of subsequent clinical venous thromboembolism. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01134068.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Konstantinides, S. V., Meyer, G., Becattini, C., Bueno, H., Geersing, G.-J., Harjola, V.-P., Huisman, M. V., Humbert, M., Jennings, C. S., Jiménez, D., et al. (2020) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz405 · Cited by 4,916
Self-citation2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism
Authors/Task Force Members, Konstantinides, S. V., Torbicki, A., Agnelli, G., Danchin, N., Fitzmaurice, D., Galiè, N., Gibbs, J. S. R., Huisman, M. V., Humbert, M., et al. (2014) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu283 · Cited by 3,128
Self-citationDiagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism with d -Dimer Adjusted to Clinical Probability
Kearon, C., de Wit, K., Parpia, S., Schulman, S., Afilalo, M., Hirsch, A., Spencer, F. A., Sharma, S., D’Aragon, F., Deshaies, J.-F., et al. (2019) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1909159 · Cited by 349
Johnson, E. D., Schell, J. C., & Rodgers, G. M. (2019) · American Journal of Hematology · doi:10.1002/ajh.25482 · Cited by 303
Foundational Considerations for Artificial Intelligence Using Ophthalmic Images
Abràmoff, M. D., Cunningham, B., Patel, B., Eydelman, M. B., Leng, T., Sakamoto, T., Blodi, B., Grenon, S. M., Wolf, R. M., Manrai, A. K., et al. (2022) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.08.023 · Cited by 96
Metadata
- Authors
- Righini, M., Van Es, J., Den Exter, P. L., Roy, P.-M., Verschuren, F., Ghuysen, A., Rutschmann, O. T., Sanchez, O., Jaffrelot, M., Trinh-Duc, A., Le Gall, C., Moustafa, F., Principe, A., Van Houten, A. A., Ten Wolde, M., Douma, R. A., Hazelaar, G., Erkens, P. M. G., Van Kralingen, K. W., Grootenboers, M. J. J. H., Durian, M. F., Cheung, Y. W., Meyer, G., Bounameaux, H., Huisman, M. V., Kamphuisen, P. W., & Le Gal, G.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2014-03-19
- Volume
- 311
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1117
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2124329650
- Cited by
- 958
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 52.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Age-Adjusted D-Dimer Cutoff Levels to Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism: The ADJUST-PE Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2014.2135
- The paper
- Righini, M., Van Es, J., Den Exter, P. L., Roy, P.-M., Verschuren, F., Ghuysen, A., Rutschmann, O. T., Sanchez, O., Jaffrelot, M., Trinh-Duc, A., Le Gall, C., Moustafa, F., Principe, A., Van Houten, A. A., Ten Wolde, M., Douma, R. A., Hazelaar, G., Erkens, P. M. G., Van Kralingen, K. W., . . . Le Gal, G. (2014). Age-Adjusted D-Dimer Cutoff Levels to Rule Out Pulmonary Embolism: The ADJUST-PE Study. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.2135
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.