Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan
|
Pulmonary Embolism Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Pulmonary Embolism Assessment of Probability of Subsequent VTE and Risk Scores |
|
Treatment |
|
Follow-Up |
|
Special Scenario |
|
Trials |
|
Case Studies |
|
Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan On the Web |
|
Directions to Hospitals Treating Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan |
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editors-in-Chief: Ujjwal Rastogi, MBBS [2]
Overview
Ventilation/perfusion scan (or V/Q scan or lung scintigraphy), show whether or not a lung area is being ventilated and perfused with blood (perfusion can be stopped due to obstruction caused by a clot). This type of examination is used less often because of the more widespread availability of CT technology, however, it may be useful in patients who have an allergy to iodinated contrastor in pregnancy due to lower radiation exposure than CT.
Ventilation/perfusion scan
This type of examination is used less often because of the more widespread availability of CT technology, however, it may be useful in patients
- Who have an allergy to iodinated contrast. To read more about contrast allergy, click here.
- In pregnancy due to lower radiation exposure than CT.
- Hospitals lacking CT facility or inexperienced medical staff.
The ventilation/perfusion ratio (V/Q) Scan: The PIOPED data suggested that normal perfusion scans are almost never associated with recurrent pulmonary embolism, even if anticoagulation is withheld.
- High-prob scans, however only identified 41% of patients with PE.
- In the setting of a high pre-test probability, a high-prob scan revealed PE in 95% of cases.
- Unfortunately, 41% of all scans in PIOPED were interpreted as intermediate, and an additional 16% were interpreted as low-probability.
- Upon angiography, however, 30 and 14% of these patients respectively were found to have PE.
- Based on these numbers, there has been a huge movement to abolish the low-probability, and intermediate-probability categories, and have readings either be high-probability, normal, or non-diagnostic.
- It should also be realized that the false-positive rate for high-prob scans was 14%, and that 72% of patients in PIOPED had a clinical – scan combination that required further investigation.
- It has been suggested by some authors that patients with an intermediate pre-test probability of PE a venous ultrasound would provide the same justification for anticoagulation as would a confirmed PE.
The following table summarizes the possible outcome of V/Q scan:
| V/Q Scan | Clinical Probability | Diagnosis |
|---|---|---|
| Normal | any probability | PE excluded |
| Low probability scan | Low | PE excluded |
| High probability scan | High | PE confirmed |
| Variable result/Non diagnostic | Variable | Serial lower extremity USG or Pulmonary angiography |
Comparison with CT Pulmonary angiography
- Spiral CT scanning is now a standard modality to non-invasively diagnose PE[1].
- Initial studies reported sensitivities for diagnosing emboli to the segmental level (4th order branch) as high as 98%, however subsequent studies have found sensitivities to be lower.
- The sensitivity is higher with more proximal clot.
- Although smaller clot, in the subsegmental arteries, is certainly not as physiologically important as the larger, more proximal clot, they may be important predictors of future, larger clots.
- The study consisting of 142 patients concluded that the sensitivity and specificity of CT angiography are higher than that of V/Q scans, as is the inter-observer agreement[2].
- They recommend getting a CT angiography as the next test following an indeterminate V/Q scan, however caution that if the pre-test probability is ‘sufficiently high’ a standard angiogram should still be obtained after a negative CT angiography.
- A cost-effective analysis using spiral CT angiography for the diagnosis of PE showed the following result[3].
- The use of CT angiography in a diagnostic algorithm was by far and away a more cost-effective strategy.
- If the sensitivity of CT angiography was < 85%, conventional angiography was associated with a lower mortality, but still remained a more expensive strategy.
References
- ↑ Schoepf UJ, Goldhaber SZ, Costello P (2004). "Spiral computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism". Circulation. 109 (18): 2160–7. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000128813.04325.08. PMID 15136509. Retrieved 2011-12-05. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ Mayo JR, Remy-Jardin M, Müller NL, Remy J, Worsley DF, Hossein-Foucher C, Kwong JS, Brown MJ (1997). "Pulmonary embolism: prospective comparison of spiral CT with ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy". Radiology. 205 (2): 447–52. PMID 9356627. Retrieved 2011-12-06. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help) - ↑ van Erkel AR, van Rossum AB, Bloem JL, Kievit J, Pattynama PM (1996). "Spiral CT angiography for suspected pulmonary embolism: a cost-effectiveness analysis". Radiology. 201 (1): 29–36. PMID 8816516. Retrieved 2011-12-05. Unknown parameter
|month=ignored (help)