Evaluation of Soluble P-Selectin as a Marker for the Diagnosis of Deep Venous Thrombosis

Objective: The combination of D-dimer and Wells score can exclude, but not confirm, the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Since thrombosis and inflammation are interrelated, we evaluated the combination of soluble P-selectin (sPsel) with other inflammatory biomarkers for the diagnosis of DV...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis Vol. 17; no. 4; pp. 425 - 431
Main Authors Ramacciotti, Eduardo, Blackburn, Susan, Hawley, Angela E., Vandy, Frank, Ballard-Lipka, Nicole, Stabler, Cathy, Baker, Nichole, Guire, Kenneth E., Rectenwald, John E., Henke, Peter K., Myers, Daniel D., Wakefield, Thomas W.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.08.2011
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1076-0296
1938-2723
1938-2723
DOI10.1177/1076029611405032

Cover

More Information
Summary:Objective: The combination of D-dimer and Wells score can exclude, but not confirm, the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Since thrombosis and inflammation are interrelated, we evaluated the combination of soluble P-selectin (sPsel) with other inflammatory biomarkers for the diagnosis of DVT. Methods: Sixty-two positive and one hundred and sixteen patients with negative DVT, by duplex scan, were prospectively evaluated for sPsel, D-dimer, C-reactive protein (CRP), microparticles (MPs; total, leukocyte, and platelet-derived and tissue factor positive microparticles), and clinical Wells score. Results: Biomarkers and clinical scores that differentiated DVT positives from negatives were sPsel (87.3 vs 53.4 ng/mL, P < .0001), D-dimer (5.8 vs 2.1 mg/ L, P < .0001), CRP (2.1 vs 0.8 μg/mL, P < .0005), and Wells score (3.2 vs 2.0, P < .0001). For MP analysis, platelet-derived MPs were found to differentiate DVT from negatives. Using multivariable logistic regression, a combination of sPsel and Wells score could establish the diagnosis of DVT (cut point ≥90 ng/mL + Wells ≥2), with a specificity of 96% and positive predictive value (PPV) of 100%, and could exclude DVT diagnosis (cut point ≤60 ng/mL and Wells <2) with a sensitivity of 99%, a specificity of 33%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 96%. Conclusion: This study establishes a biomarker and clinical profile combination that can both confirm and exclude the diagnosis of DVT.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1076-0296
1938-2723
1938-2723
DOI:10.1177/1076029611405032