Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 1, 2026

A Multicenter MRI Protocol for the Evaluation and Quantification of Deep Vein Thrombosis
Published on: June 2, 2015
Evaluating outcomes of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism using an age-adjusted cutoff with a D-dimer
Daniel Novak1, Eric Quinn1, Mahlaqa Butt1
1Department of Emergency Medicine, Maimonides Medical Center, 4802 10th Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11219, USA.
Introduction:
Studies have suggested that an age-adjusted D-dimer (AADD) could improve specificity while maintaining sensitivity for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE). Most laboratories and published data report D-dimer in fibrinogen equivalent units, but some laboratory assays report using D-dimer units (DDU). However, only two small studies have examined AADD with a DDU-based assay. Our study aims to assess the sensitivity and specificity of AADD cutoffs, compared to the conventional cutoffs, in a large cohort of patients who underwent D-dimer testing using a DDU-based assay, for suspected PE.
Methods:
We included 1831 patients who presented to the emergency department and underwent a diagnostic workup that included a D-dimer test followed by computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTA). The laboratory utilized the HemosIL D-Dimer HS reagent, reporting D-dimer values in DDU (ng/mL). We retrospectively adjusted D-dimer levels for patients using the formula: age (years) x 5 ng/mL. This adjustment created a comparison group to evaluate the test characteristics of the AADD cutoff compared to the conventional cutoff.
Results:
The conventional D-dimer cutoff of 230 ng/mL had a sensitivity of 97.4 % (95 % Confidence Interval [CI]: 95.3-99.4 %), specificity of 7.3 % (CI: 6.0-8.6 %), positive predictive value (PPV) of 13 % (CI: 11.4-14.6 %), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.1 % (CI: 91.3-98.9 %). The AADD cutoff had a sensitivity of 96.1 % (CI: 93.5-98.6 %), specificity of 16.6 % (CI: 14.8-18.4 %), PPV of 14.1 % (CI: 12.3-15.8 %), and NPV of 96.7 % (CI: 94.6-98.8 %).
Conclusion:
In this study using a DDU-based assay, the specificity of the AADD cutoff was greater while the sensitivity was similar to that of the unadjusted cutoff, with no statistically significant difference observed.
Related Concept Videos
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Pulmonary Embolism III: Nursing Management

