The diagnostic value of D-dimer in acute aortic dissection: a meta-analysis

• Published in: Journal of cardiothoracic surgery Vol. 16; no. 1; pp. 1 - 11
• Main Authors: Yao, Jian, Bai, Tao, Yang, Bo, Sun, Lizhong
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central 27.11.2021; BioMed Central Ltd; BMC
• Subjects: Accuracy; Acute aortic dissection; Aorta; Aortic dissection; Bias; Biomarkers; Cardiac Surgery; D-dimer; Diagnostic value; Dimers; Dissecting aneurysm; Dissection; Draw ratio; Evaluation; Heterogeneity; Likelihood ratio; Mathematical analysis; Medical diagnosis; Medical imaging; Medical research; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Medicine, Experimental; Meta-analysis; Mortality; Patients; Quality assessment; Quality control; Review; Subgroups; Surgery; Thoracic Surgery; Acute aortic dissection; D-dimer; Diagnostic value; Meta-analysis
• ISSN: 1749-8090; 1749-8090
• DOI: 10.1186/s13019-021-01726-1

Objective This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of D-dimer for acute aortic dissection (AAD) by the method of meta-analysis. Methods PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases from the establishment of the databases to December 2020 were systematically searched, and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) system was used to evaluate the quality of the literature. STATA 15.0 software was applied to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (+LR), negative likelihood ratio (−LR) to draw summary receiver operating characteristics (SROC) curve and calculate the area under the curve (AUC). Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were used to explore the source of heterogeneity. Results A total of 16 clinical studies were enrolled in this study, including 1135 patients. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the pooled sensitivity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.91–0.98), the pooled specificity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.57–0.81), and the pooled DOR was 56.57 (95% CI 25.11–127.44), the pooled +LR was 3.25 (95% CI 2.18–4.85), the pooled −LR was 0.06 (95% CI 0.03–0.12), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI 0.91–0.95). Meta-regression and subgroup analysis results showed that publication year, sample size and cutoff value might be sources of heterogeneity. When the concentration of D-dimer was less than or equal to 500 ng/ml, the sensitivity significantly increased. Conclusion D-dimer has an excellent diagnostic value for AAD. It is a useful tool for detecting suspected AAD because of the excellent pooled sensitivity. D-dimer ≤ 500 ng/ml increases the potential to identify the suspected patients with AAD.