The DiPEP (Diagnosis of PE in Pregnancy) biomarker study: An observational cohort study augmented with additional cases to determine the diagnostic utility of biomarkers for suspected venous thromboembolism during pregnancy and puerperium
- PMID: 29359796
- PMCID: PMC5887890
- DOI: 10.1111/bjh.15102
The DiPEP (Diagnosis of PE in Pregnancy) biomarker study: An observational cohort study augmented with additional cases to determine the diagnostic utility of biomarkers for suspected venous thromboembolism during pregnancy and puerperium
Abstract
This study aimed to estimate the diagnostic utility of biomarkers for suspected venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy and the puerperium. Research nurses/midwives collected blood samples from 310 pregnant/postpartum women with suspected pulmonary emboli (PE) and 18 with diagnosed deep vein thrombosis (DVT). VTE was diagnosed using imaging, treatment and adverse outcome data. Primary analysis was limited to women with conclusive imaging (36 with VTE, 247 without). The area under the curve (AUC) for each biomarker was: activated partial thromboplastin time 0·669 (95% confidence interval 0·570-0·768), B-type natriuretic peptide 0·549 (0·453-0·645), C-reactive protein 0·542 (0·445-0·639), Clauss fibrinogen 0·589 (0·476-0·701), D-Dimer (by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) 0·668 (0·561-0·776), near-patient D-Dimer 0·651 (0·545-0·758), mid-regional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide 0·524 (0·418-0·630), prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 0·562 (0·462-0·661), plasmin-antiplasmin complexes 0·639 (0·536-0·742), prothombin time 0·613 (0·508-0·718), thrombin generation lag time 0·702 (0·598-0·806), thrombin generation endogenous potential 0·559 (0·437-0·681), thrombin generation peak 0·596 (0·478-0·715), thrombin generation time to peak 0·655 (0·541-0·769), soluble tissue factor 0·531 (0·424-0·638) and serum troponin 0·597 (0·499-0·695). No diagnostically useful threshold for diagnosing or ruling out VTE was identified. In pregnancy and the puerperium, conventional and candidate biomarkers have no utility either for their negative or positive predictive value in the diagnosis of VTE.
Keywords: D-dimer; biomarkers; diagnosis; postpartum; pregnancy; pulmonary embolism.
© 2018 The Authors. British Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Figures



References
-
- Browne, A.M. , Cronin, C.G. , NiMhuircheartaigh, J. , Donagh, C. , Morrison, J.J. , Lohan, D.G. & Murphy, J.M. (2014) Evaluation of imaging quality of pulmonary 64‐MDCT angiography in pregnancy and puerperium. American Journal of Roentgenology, 202, 60–64. - PubMed
-
- Cutts, B.A. , Tran, H.A. , Merriman, E. , Nandurkar, D. , Soo, G. , DasGupta, D. , Prassannan, N. & Hunt, B.J. (2014) The utility of the wells clinical prediction model and ventilation‐perfusion scanning for pulmonary embolism in pregnancy. Blood Coagulation and Fibrinolysis, 25, 375–378. - PubMed
-
- Damodaram, M. , Kaladindi, M. , Luckit, J. & Yoong, W. (2009) D‐dimers as a screening test for venous thromboembolism in pregnancy: is it of any use? Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 29, 101–103. - PubMed
-
- Goodacre, S. , Nelson‐Piercy, C. , Hunt, B. & Chan, W.‐S. (2015) When should we use diagnostic imaging to investigate for pulmonary embolism in pregnant and postpartum women? Emergency Medical Journal, 32, 78–82. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials