Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Pulmonary Embolism Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Pulmonary Embolism from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Triggers

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

Diagnostic criteria

Assessment of Clinical Probability and Risk Scores

Pulmonary Embolism Assessment of Probability of Subsequent VTE and Risk Scores

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Arterial Blood Gas Analysis

D-dimer

Biomarkers

Electrocardiogram

Chest X Ray

Ventilation/Perfusion Scan

Echocardiography

Compression Ultrasonography

CT

MRI

Treatment

Treatment approach

Medical Therapy

IVC Filter

Pulmonary Embolectomy

Pulmonary Thromboendarterectomy

Discharge Care and Long Term Treatment

Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Follow-Up

Support group

Special Scenario

Pregnancy

Cancer

Trials

Landmark Trials

Case Studies

Case #1

Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan

CDC on Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan

Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan in the news

Blogs on Pulmonary embolism ventilation/perfusion scan

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

Principle

Technetium (Tc)-99m labelled macro-aggregated albumin particle, when injected, block small fractions of pulmonary capillaries and thus helps in assessment of lung perfusion at tissue levels via scintigraphy. If there is an occlusion of any branch of pulmonary artery, the particle will not reach the capillary, rendering the area "cold" on subsequent imaging.

Indications

This type of examination is used less often because of the more widespread availability of CT technology, however, it may be useful in patients

  1. Who have an allergy to iodinated contrast. To read more about contrast allergy, click here.
  2. In pregnancy due to lower radiation exposure than CT.
  3. Hospitals lacking CT facility or inexperienced medical staff.

The PIOPED data suggested, that the normal perfusion scans are almost never associated with recurrent pulmonary embolism, even if anticoagulation is withheld.

  • High-probability 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 in patients with an intermediate pre-test probability of PE, a venous ultrasound would provide the same justification for anticoagulation, as would a confirmed PE. Although, false positive results on venous ultrasound (3 percent patient reported in a study) would result in the use of anticoagulation in patients without PE.[1]

The following table summarizes the possible outcome of V/Q scan:

V/Q Scan Clinical Probability Diagnosis
Normal any probability PE excluded[2]
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.[3]
    • 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.[4]
      • 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.[5]
    • 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.
  • According to the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the radiation exposure, from a lung scan with 100 MBq of Tc-99 m macroaggregate of albumi (MAA) is 1.1 mSv.
    • The radiation exposure from spiral CT is 2–6 mSv.[6]
    • The radiation exposure from plain chest X-ray is approximately 0.05 mSv.

References

  1. Turkstra F, Kuijer PM, van Beek EJ, Brandjes DP, ten Cate JW, Büller HR (1997). "Diagnostic utility of ultrasonography of leg veins in patients suspected of having pulmonary embolism". Ann. Intern. Med. 126 (10): 775–81. PMID 9148650. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help); |access-date= requires |url= (help)
  2. Hoeper MM (2009). "Definition, classification, and epidemiology of pulmonary arterial hypertension". Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 30 (4): 369–75. doi:10.1055/s-0029-1233306. PMID 19634076. Retrieved 2011-12-06. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  3. 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)
  4. 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)
  5. 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)
  6. "Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals (addendum 2 to ICRP publication 53)". Ann ICRP. 28 (3): 1–126. 1998. PMID 10840563. Retrieved 2011-12-06.

Template:WH Template:WS