Why the study?
Does ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy (V/PSPECT) offer diagnostic advantages over CT for pulmonary embolism?
Does ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy (V/PSPECT) offer diagnostic advantages over CT for pulmonary embolism?
V/PSPECT is a highly sensitive, low-radiation alternative to CT for diagnosing and quantifying pulmonary embolism, though its clinical use is limited by availability.
May support selective V/PSPECT use for low-radiation PE imaging; leaves open routine adoption pending availability improvements.
Ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy, a first hand method for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, PE, is challenged by tomography of the pulmonary arteries, CT. An additional method is based upon dead space analysis. Tomographic ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy, V/PSPECT is superior to planar technique. Important is interpretation criteria based upon pattern recognition and clinical information. With optimal strategy, the rate of non-diagnostic findings is only about 1%. The sensitivity of CT is too low to exclude subsegmental PE,. The radiation dose is for CT is several times higher than for V/PSPECT. Quantification of PE, only offered by V/PSPECT has impact on therapy and is vital for follow up. Limited availability of V/PSPECT makes CT an essential element in a strategy for diagnosis of PE. The single breath test for CO2 offers an alternative when imaging techniques are not available or when radiation is a particular problem in early pregnancy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jonson et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: