scholarly journals Letter by Roncon et al Regarding Article, “Diagnostic Accuracy of the Aortic Dissection Detection Risk Score Plus D-Dimer for Acute Aortic Syndromes: The ADvISED Prospective Multicenter Study”

Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 138 (4) ◽  
pp. 445-446
Author(s):  
Loris Roncon ◽  
Marco Zuin ◽  
Pietro Zonzin
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Multicenter Study ◽  
Prospective Multicenter Study ◽  
Acute Aortic Syndromes ◽  
D Dimer

scholarly journals Diagnostic Accuracy of the Aortic Dissection Detection Risk Score Plus D-Dimer for Acute Aortic Syndromes

Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 137 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peiman Nazerian ◽  
Christian Mueller ◽  
Alexandre de Matos Soeiro ◽  
Bernd A. Leidel ◽  
Sibilla Anna Teresa Salvadeo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Acute Aortic Syndromes ◽  
D Dimer

scholarly journals Systematic Review of Aortic Dissection Detection Risk Score Plus D‐dimer for Diagnostic Rule‐out Of Suspected Acute Aortic Syndromes

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1013-1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Bima ◽  
Emanuele Pivetta ◽  
Peiman Nazerian ◽  
Mamoru Toyofuku ◽  
Riccardo Gorla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Acute Aortic Syndromes ◽  
D Dimer ◽  
Rule Out

scholarly journals Accuracy of aortic dissection detection risk score alone or with D-dimer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. S32-S39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuke Tsutsumi ◽  
Yasushi Tsujimoto ◽  
Sei Takahashi ◽  
Asuka Tsuchiya ◽  
Shingo Fukuma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Failure Rate ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Screening Test ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Acute Aortic Syndrome ◽  
D Dimer

Background: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of the acute aortic dissection detection risk score (ADD-RS) alone or with D-dimer as a screening test to exclude acute aortic syndrome. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the diagnostic accuracy of ADD-RS. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials up to 12 December 2018. Results: We identified nine studies involving 26,598 patients for ADD-RS alone and 3421 patients with D-dimer. Overall, the methodological quality based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 was moderate to high. Bivariate meta-analyses showed that the pooled sensitivities were 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90, 0.96) at the threshold of ADD-RS ≥1, 0.46 (95% CI, 0.34, 0.59) at ADD-RS ≥2, 1.00 (95% CI 0.99, 1.00) at ADD-RS ≥1 with D-dimer and 0.99 (95% CI 0.97, 1.00) at ADD-RS ≥2 with D-dimer. For the low prevalence population, failure rate and efficiency were 0.8% and 38.3% at ADD-RS ≥1, 0.03% and 14.5% at ADD-RS ≥1 with D-dimer, and 0.1% and 33.6% at ADD-RS ≥2 with D-dimer, respectively. For the high prevalence population, failure rate and efficiency were 3.8% and 33.3% at ADD-RS ≥1, 0.2% and 12.3% at ADD-RS ≥1 with D-dimer and 0.6% and 28.4% at ADD-RS ≥2 with D-dimer, respectively. Conclusions: ADD-RS alone or with D-dimer was a useful screening test with high sensitivity to exclude acute aortic syndrome. However, the optimal threshold of ADD-RS alone or with D-dimer may depend on the clinical setting.

Diagnostic accuracy of guided cervical biopsies: a prospective multicenter study comparing the histopathology of simultaneous biopsy and cone specimen

2010 ◽  
Vol 203 (4) ◽  
pp. 321.e1-321.e6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Zuchna ◽  
Martina Hager ◽  
Barbara Tringler ◽  
Alexander Georgoulopoulos ◽  
Alexandra Ciresa-Koenig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Multicenter Study ◽  
Prospective Multicenter Study
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document