Contribution of V/Q SPECT to planar scintigraphy in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism

Quirce, R.; Ibáñez-Bravo, S.; Jiménez-Bonilla, J.; Martínez-Rodríguez, I.; Martínez-Amador, N.; Ortega-Nava, F.; Lavado-Pérez, C.; Bravo-Ferrer, Z.; Carril, J.M.

doi:10.1016/j.remnie.2014.03.021

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparing V/P planar and V/P SPECT Gutte et al reported that V/P SPECT had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 87% while, V/P planar had a sensitivity of 64% and specificity of 72% [17] . The value of V/P SPECT over planar images were recently confirmed by Quirice at al [23] . In a studied cohort 63 of 102 V/P planar examinations (62%) were non-diagnostic [23] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…The value of V/P SPECT over planar images were recently confirmed by Quirice at al [23] . In a studied cohort 63 of 102 V/P planar examinations (62%) were non-diagnostic [23] . V/P SPECT allows better segmental definition of perfusion and ventilation defects and helped to significantly reduce the number of inconclusive results to 4.9%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…V/P SPECT allows better segmental definition of perfusion and ventilation defects and helped to significantly reduce the number of inconclusive results to 4.9%. The sensitivity is improved by lessening the number of potential false negative results of the planar technique [23] . The high incidence of inconclusive studies for V/P planar is explained by the interpretation criteria applied [23] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sensitivity is improved by lessening the number of potential false negative results of the planar technique [23] . The high incidence of inconclusive studies for V/P planar is explained by the interpretation criteria applied [23] . Reinartz et al found a sensitivity and specificity of 0.76 and 0.85, respectively, with V/P planar compared to 0.97 and 0.91 with V/P SPECT [19] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ventilation/perfusion tomography – V/P-SPECT vs planar technique

Begić

Opanković

Begovic-Hadzimuratovic

et al. 2014

CRIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pulmonary embolism (PE) can only be diagnosed with imaging techniques, which in practice is performed using ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy(V/P scintigraphy) or multi-detector computed tomography of the pulmonary arteries (MDCT). The basic principle for the diagnosis of PE based upon V/P scintigraphy is to recognize lung segments or subsegments without perfusion but preserved ventilation, i. e. mismatch. Ventilation/ perfusion single photon emission tomography-V/P SPECT has during the last 10 years started to replace V/P planar based on higher sensitivity, specificity and low non-diagnostic findings. A twenty seven year old woman was suspected for PE when presented to the outpatient clinic due to dyspnea, frequent yawing, oppression in the throat, 3 days after being treated of superficial varices cruris with foam sclerotherapy-UGFS. She was first examined with chest x-ray, MDCT, hearth ultrasonography and V/P planar. V/P planar was reported as very low probability for PE. All the other initial examinations were normal. Patient symptoms did not decline, and reffering clinitian put her on therapy with LMWH.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%