Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835
Books209
All textbooksMedical textbooksHuman anatomyOrganisms & biodiversityOther sciences
Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›Open textbooks›Diagnostic strategies for suspected acute aortic syndrome: systematic review, meta-analysis, decision-analytic modelling and value of information analysis›Conclusions

Continue where you left off ()

GO BEYOND THE PAGEReading is just the beginning.

Turn scientific reading into research. Compare studies, examine evidence, and organize your findings in EvidenceHelix Workspace.

Explore Research Workspace →

Diagnostic strategies for suspected acute aortic syndrome: systematic review, meta-analysis, decision-analytic modelling and value of information analysis · Conclusions

Conclusions

CC BY 4.0 · National Institute for Health and Care Research · approximately 2 min read

The ADD-RS and D-dimer, alone or in combination, provide useful diagnostic information that can assist clinical decision-making, specifically the selection of patients for CTA. ADD-RS > 0, D-dimer > 500 ng/ml and combinations of ADD-RS and D-dimer have high sensitivity (> 90%) with variable specificity (22% to 67%). The combination of ADD-RS of zero and D-dimer < 500 ng/ml effectively rules out AAS (sensitivity 99.8%). However, unselective use of ADD-RS or D-dimer in patients with very low prevalence of AAS will result in a high rate of FP cases requiring CTA.

Clinical scores other than the ADD-RS and biomarkers other than D-dimer currently lack sufficient evidence of accuracy to be recommended for clinical use in diagnosing AAS. Further research using an appropriate design and sample size is required to determine the accuracy of alternative biomarkers for AAS.

Decision-analytic modelling showed that a strategy based on the Canadian guideline (CTA if ADD-RS > 1 or if ADD-RS = 1 with D-dimer > 500 ng/ml) is cost-effective but, if applied unselectively to any patient whose symptoms were compatible with AAS, would require CTA capacity to be tripled or quadrupled.

Secondary analysis suggested that if the diagnostic strategies were only applied to patients that clinicians considered to have a non-zero probability of AAS, then the strategy based on the Canadian guidelines would be cost-effective and deliverable with only a 60% increase in CTA capacity. A strategy of CTA if ADD-RS > 1 or D-dimer > 500 ng/ml could also be cost-effective and deliverable if clinical judgement were used to select a higher prevalence cohort. Research is required to determine how these strategies would be delivered in practice and how an appropriate population would be selected for investigation.

For patients currently receiving CTA, the strategy of ADD-RS > 1 or D-dimer > 500 ng/ml could halve the number of CTA undertaken and would be cost-effective according to NICE thresholds for willingness to pay but would result in an estimated 143 cases of missed AAS per year across the NHS in England and Wales.

← Research recommendationsReferences →

Attribution. Steve Goodacre; Abdullah Pandor; Praveen Thokala; Sa Ren; Munira Essat; Shijie Ren et al. (2025). Diagnostic strategies for suspected acute aortic syndrome: systematic review, meta-analysis, decision-analytic modelling and value of information analysis. National Institute for Health and Care Research. Copyright © 2025 Goodacre et al. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. NCBI Bookshelf NBK617946. CC BY 4.0. Original source ↗. Text reproduced from the Bookshelf XML without changing wording; figures, images and supplements are not reproduced.

In this chapter Contents

  • Conclusions

Source

OpenStax source file ↗

Source record ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support