Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Ventilation/Perfusion SPECT lung scintigraphy and computed tomography pulmonary angiography in patients with clinical suspicion of pulmonary embolism.
Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2016 Jul-Aug; 35(4):215-20RE

Abstract

The aim was to compare ventilation/perfusion SPECT lung scintigraphy (V/Q-SPECT) and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in patients with suspicion of pulmonary embolism (PE).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospectively designed study included 53 patients with intermediate or high clinical probability of PE. A V/Q-SPECT and CTPA was performed on all patients. The V/Q-SPECT was interpreted according to the European Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (EANMMI) guidelines. CTPA was reported as positive, negative, or indeterminate.

RESULTS

CTPA was positive in 22 cases, negative in 28, and indeterminate in 3. V/Q-SPECT was positive in 27 cases, negative in 24, and non-diagnostic in 2. In the 22 with positive CTPA, V/Q-SPECT was positive in 18, negative in 3, and non-diagnostic in 1. In the 28 with negative CTPA, V/Q-SPECT was positive in 8, negative in 19, and non-diagnostic in 1. In the 3 with indeterminate CTPA, V/Q-SPECT was positive in 1 and negative in 2. In the 2 non-diagnostic cases V/Q-SPECT, CTPA was positive in 1 and negative in one. In the 10 high clinical probabilities, CTPA and V/Q-SPECT were positive in 7, negative in 2, and in 1, CTPA was positive and V/Q-SPECT negative. In the 38 intermediate probability group, CTPA and V/Q-SPECT were positive in 11, negative in 17, with CTPA negative and V/Q-SPECT positive in 8, and in 2 CTPA was positive and V/Q-SPECT negative. The results show that V/Q-SPECT detected PE in 5 patients more than CTPA.

CONCLUSION

Our results show a 77% concordance of both techniques. Overall V/Q-SPECT detected PE in 18% more patients than CTPA in the intermediate group. Both techniques have a complementary role when a diagnosis cannot be made with one of them.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Nuclear Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Molecular Imaging Group IDIVAL, Santander, Spain. Electronic address: susanaibravo@gmail.com.Nuclear Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Molecular Imaging Group IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.Nuclear Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Molecular Imaging Group IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.Nuclear Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Molecular Imaging Group IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.Nuclear Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Molecular Imaging Group IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.Nuclear Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Molecular Imaging Group IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.Radiology Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Santander, Spain.Internal Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Santander, Spain.Nuclear Medicine Department, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Cantabria University, Molecular Imaging Group IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng spa

PubMed ID

26838481

Citation

Ibáñez-Bravo, S, et al. "Ventilation/Perfusion SPECT Lung Scintigraphy and Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography in Patients With Clinical Suspicion of Pulmonary Embolism." Revista Espanola De Medicina Nuclear E Imagen Molecular, vol. 35, no. 4, 2016, pp. 215-20.
Ibáñez-Bravo S, Banzo I, Quirce R, et al. Ventilation/Perfusion SPECT lung scintigraphy and computed tomography pulmonary angiography in patients with clinical suspicion of pulmonary embolism. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2016;35(4):215-20.
Ibáñez-Bravo, S., Banzo, I., Quirce, R., Martínez-Rodríguez, I., Jiménez-Bonilla, J., Martínez-Amador, N., ... Carril, J. M. (2016). Ventilation/Perfusion SPECT lung scintigraphy and computed tomography pulmonary angiography in patients with clinical suspicion of pulmonary embolism. Revista Espanola De Medicina Nuclear E Imagen Molecular, 35(4), pp. 215-20. doi:10.1016/j.remn.2015.12.008.
Ibáñez-Bravo S, et al. Ventilation/Perfusion SPECT Lung Scintigraphy and Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography in Patients With Clinical Suspicion of Pulmonary Embolism. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2016;35(4):215-20. PubMed PMID: 26838481.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Ventilation/Perfusion SPECT lung scintigraphy and computed tomography pulmonary angiography in patients with clinical suspicion of pulmonary embolism. AU - Ibáñez-Bravo,S, AU - Banzo,I, AU - Quirce,R, AU - Martínez-Rodríguez,I, AU - Jiménez-Bonilla,J, AU - Martínez-Amador,N, AU - Parra,J A, AU - González-Macías,J, AU - Carril,J M, Y1 - 2016/01/30/ PY - 2015/11/09/received PY - 2015/12/18/revised PY - 2015/12/23/accepted PY - 2016/2/4/entrez PY - 2016/2/4/pubmed PY - 2018/1/3/medline KW - Enfermedad venosa tromboembólica KW - Gammagrafía V/Q KW - Gammagrafía pulmonar de ventilación-perfusión KW - Pulmonary embolism KW - SPECT V/Q KW - Tromboembolismo pulmonar KW - V/Q SPECT KW - V/Q scintigraphy KW - Venous thromboembolic disease KW - Ventilation/perfusion lung scan SP - 215 EP - 20 JF - Revista espanola de medicina nuclear e imagen molecular JO - Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol VL - 35 IS - 4 N2 - UNLABELLED: The aim was to compare ventilation/perfusion SPECT lung scintigraphy (V/Q-SPECT) and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in patients with suspicion of pulmonary embolism (PE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospectively designed study included 53 patients with intermediate or high clinical probability of PE. A V/Q-SPECT and CTPA was performed on all patients. The V/Q-SPECT was interpreted according to the European Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (EANMMI) guidelines. CTPA was reported as positive, negative, or indeterminate. RESULTS: CTPA was positive in 22 cases, negative in 28, and indeterminate in 3. V/Q-SPECT was positive in 27 cases, negative in 24, and non-diagnostic in 2. In the 22 with positive CTPA, V/Q-SPECT was positive in 18, negative in 3, and non-diagnostic in 1. In the 28 with negative CTPA, V/Q-SPECT was positive in 8, negative in 19, and non-diagnostic in 1. In the 3 with indeterminate CTPA, V/Q-SPECT was positive in 1 and negative in 2. In the 2 non-diagnostic cases V/Q-SPECT, CTPA was positive in 1 and negative in one. In the 10 high clinical probabilities, CTPA and V/Q-SPECT were positive in 7, negative in 2, and in 1, CTPA was positive and V/Q-SPECT negative. In the 38 intermediate probability group, CTPA and V/Q-SPECT were positive in 11, negative in 17, with CTPA negative and V/Q-SPECT positive in 8, and in 2 CTPA was positive and V/Q-SPECT negative. The results show that V/Q-SPECT detected PE in 5 patients more than CTPA. CONCLUSION: Our results show a 77% concordance of both techniques. Overall V/Q-SPECT detected PE in 18% more patients than CTPA in the intermediate group. Both techniques have a complementary role when a diagnosis cannot be made with one of them. SN - 2253-8070 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/26838481/Ventilation/Perfusion_SPECT_lung_scintigraphy_and_computed_tomography_pulmonary_angiography_in_patients_with_clinical_suspicion_of_pulmonary_embolism_ L2 - http://www.elsevier.es/en/linksolver/ft/pii/S2253-654X(15)00193-6 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -