Left Rule, D-Dimer Measurement and Complete Ultrasonography to Rule Out Deep Vein Thrombosis During Pregnancy.
NCT ID: NCT01708239
Last Updated: 2018-05-04
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
300 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2012-10-31
2019-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Clinical probability assessment by clinical prediction rules (CPRs) is a crucial step in the management of suspected DVT. However, the most commonly used CPR for DVT, the Wells' score, has never been validated in pregnant women. Recently, the 'LEFt' clinical prediction rule was derived and internally validated. A prospective validation of this rule is now warranted, and we plan to use it in our prospective study.
The second step used in the diagnostic strategy including non-pregnant patients is D-dimer measurement. The test has been widely validated in non-pregnant patients and, in association with a non-high clinical probability, it allows to safely rule out DVT.
As D-dimer level raise steadily during pregnancy, the specificity of the test decreases and it is less useful in pregnant women. Data from the literature clearly suggest that the usual cut-off set a 500 ng/ml would safely rule out DVT in pregnant women \[6\]. As the usual cut-off has never been prospectively validated in pregnant women with suspected DVT, we would like to use it in our study.
Some studies suggested that complete CUS is safe to rule out DVT in pregnant women. However, this test is not always available. Therefore, a strategy in which the association of clinical probability assessment and D-dimer measurement would allow to safely rule out DVT in a significant proportion of patients without performing a complete CUS, would be of great help in everyday clinical practice and would probably be cost-effective.
Therefore, we plan a prospective study to assess the safety of a sequential diagnostic strategy based on the assessment of clinical probability with the LEFt rule, D-dimer measurement and complete CUS in pregnant women with suspected DVT.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Safely Ruling Out Deep Vein Thrombosis in Pregnancy With the LEFt Clinical Decision Rule and D-Dimer
NCT02507180
Study of Biological Determinants of Bleeding Postpartum
NCT02884804
Venous Thromboembolism in Pregnancy Study
NCT00856076
Haemorrhages and Thromboembolic Venous Disease of the Postpartum
NCT02443610
Pregnancy and Risk of Venous Thromboembolism
NCT03659708
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
In non-pregnant patients, sequential diagnostic strategies based on 1) the assessment of clinical probability, 2) D-dimer measurement and 3) compression ultrasonography (CUS) have been widely validated \[2, 3\].
Clinical probability assessment by clinical prediction rules (CPRs) is a crucial step in the management of suspected DVT. However, the most commonly used CPR for DVT, the Wells' score, has never been validated in pregnant women \[3\]. Recently, the 'LEFt' clinical prediction rule was derived and internally validated by Chan et al. among 194 pregnant women investigated for suspected DVT\[4\]. This rule combines three variables: symptoms in the left leg ("L"), calf circumference difference equal or greater than 2 centimeters ("E" for edema) and first trimester presentation ("Ft") \[4\].
We performed an external validation of this rule on a recently published prospective cohort of pregnant patients with suspected DVT (submitted to JTH). This external validation showed that a negative "LEFt" rule accurately identified pregnant women in whom the proportion of confirmed DVT appears to be very low. A prospective validation of this rule is now warranted, and we plan to use it in our prospective study.
The second step used in the diagnostic strategy including non-pregnant patients is D-dimer measurement. The test has been widely validated in non-pregnant patients and, in association with a non-high clinical probability, it allows to safely rule out DVT \[5\].
As D-dimer level raise steadily during pregnancy, the specificity of the test decreases and it is less useful in pregnant women. A recent study suggested that the currently available sensitive D-dimer assays that are used for the exclusion in symptomatic non-pregnant women have the potential to exclude DVT in symptomatic pregnant women with the application of higher cut-points \[6\]. Even if this data arises from a small study, it clearly suggests that the usual cut-off set a 500 ng/ml would safely rule out DVT in pregnant women \[6\]. As the usual cut-off has never been prospectively validated in pregnant women with suspected DVT, we would like, as a first step, to use it in our study.
In pregnant patients, limited data is available on the use of complete compression ultrasonography to rule out DVT. In a recent prospective management study, we included 226 pregnant and post-partum women with suspected lower limb DVT. We observed a 1.1% (95% CI:0.3-4.0) three-month thromboembolic event rate in those left untreated on the basis of a negative single complete CUS \[7\]. This result is in line with what was reported after a normal phlebography, the gold standard test \[8\].
Even if complete CUS is safe to rule out DVT in pregnant women, current diagnostic strategies for suspected DVT in non-pregnant patients rely on the use of clinical probability and D-Dimer prior to leg veins imaging \[5\]. However, no management outcome study on the safety and usefulness of D-Dimer to rule out DVT in pregnant women is available to date. Another limitation of the strategies based on a single unique complete CUS, is that every woman has to undergo complete CUS. However, this test is not always available. Therefore, a strategy in which the association of clinical probability assessment and D-dimer measurement would allow to safely rule out DVT in a significant proportion of patients without performing a complete CUS, would be of great help in everyday clinical practice and would probably be cost-effective.
Therefore, we plan a prospective study to assess the safety of a sequential diagnostic strategy based on the assessment of clinical probability with the LEFt rule, D-dimer measurement and complete CUS in pregnant women with suspected DVT.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Pregnant women
Pregnant women with suspected DVT assessed by the LEFt rule, D-dimer measurement and complete ultrasonography.
Left rule, D-dimer measurement and complete ultrasonography in pregnant women.
Diagnostic strategy based on the LEFt rule, D-dimer measurement and complete ultrasonography
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Left rule, D-dimer measurement and complete ultrasonography in pregnant women.
Diagnostic strategy based on the LEFt rule, D-dimer measurement and complete ultrasonography
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* No available informed consent
* Associated suspicion of pulmonary embolism
* Ongoing anticoagulant treatment
* Planned anticoagulant treatment at therapeutic dosage during pregnancy
18 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University Hospital, Brest
OTHER
The Ottawa Hospital
OTHER
Marc Righini
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Marc Righini
Principal investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Grégoire Le Gal, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
The Ottawa Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Geneva University Hospital
Geneva, , Switzerland
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Geneva University Hospital
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.