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
. 2011 Aug;17(4):425-31.
doi: 10.1177/1076029611405032. Epub 2011 May 17.

Evaluation of soluble P-selectin as a marker for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis

Affiliations

Evaluation of soluble P-selectin as a marker for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis

Eduardo Ramacciotti et al. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2011 Aug.

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

None

References

    1. Heit JACA, Anderson FJ. Estimated annual number of incident and recurrent, non-fatal venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in the US. Blood. 2005;106:11. - PubMed
    1. 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;349:1227–35. - PubMed
    1. Barnes DM, Wakefield TW, Rectenwald JE. Novel Biomarkers Associated with Deep Venous Thrombosis: A Comprehensive Review. Biomark Insights. 2008;3:93–100. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pabinger I, Ay C. Biomarkers and venous thromboembolism. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2009;29:332–6. - PubMed
    1. Stewart JG. Neutrophils and Deep Venous Thrombosis. Haemostasis. 1993;23:127–40. - PubMed

Publication types