Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1991 Mar 4;65(3):233-6.

Failure of computerized impedance plethysmography in the diagnostic management of patients with clinically suspected deep-vein thrombosis

Affiliations
  • PMID: 2048047
Comparative Study

Failure of computerized impedance plethysmography in the diagnostic management of patients with clinically suspected deep-vein thrombosis

P Prandoni et al. Thromb Haemost. .

Abstract

Before a new diagnostic modality can be introduced in clinical medicine, the validity of both a normal and abnormal test result have to be assessed prospectively in an appropriate patient group. We have evaluated the clinical validity of a new computerized impedance plethysmography (CIP) in the diagnostic management of 381 consecutive patients with clinically suspected venous thrombosis. In patients with serially normal CIP results, the diagnosis of venous thrombosis was refuted and, consequently, they were not treated with anticoagulant therapy and all were followed up for a period of 6 months to estimate the occurrence of symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The study was prematurely terminated by the safety monitoring committee because of an unacceptably high incidence of confirmed venous thromboembolism (10 patients, 3.2%; 95% confidence interval: 1.6% to 6%), including 4 episodes of fatal pulmonary embolism. In a subsequent explanatory study using ultrasonography in 29 other symptomatic patients who had at least 2 repeated normal CIP test results, the failure of CIP to detect proximal vein thrombosis was confirmed in 4 patients (14%). The reasons for this failure are probably related to the use of a modified device to measure impedance in the CIP apparatus, resulting in a lower ability to separate patients without venous thrombosis from those with the disease. We concluded that CIP is insensitive for the detection of proximal vein thrombosis and, therefore, not clinically useful in the diagnostic management of patients with suspected venous thrombosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Publication types