Efficacy of Ventilation Perfusion Lung Scanning and Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography for Chronic Thrombo-Embolic Pulmonary Hypertension

G. Currie, Janelle Wheat, Michael Tong
{"title":"Efficacy of Ventilation Perfusion Lung Scanning and Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography for Chronic Thrombo-Embolic Pulmonary Hypertension","authors":"G. Currie, Janelle Wheat, Michael Tong","doi":"10.31487/j.jnmrs.2020.01.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The diagnostic approach for patients with suspected Chronic Thrombo-Embolic Pulmonary\nHypertension (CTEPH) is a combination of clinical and pre-test probability assessment, and diagnostic\nimaging of computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) or lung ventilation and perfusion\nscintigraphy (V/Q). There is a paucity of literature, particularly for Southeast Asia (SEA) populations,\nregarding the efficacy of these imaging approaches. This study investigated the sensitivity and specificity\nof V/Q and CTPA in the diagnosis of CTEPH.\nMethods: A retrospective analysis was undertaken on 133 consecutive patients presenting for pulmonary\nhypertension (PH). The population included 42 males, 91 females, 683 V/Q images and 6288 CTPA images\nfor patients in the age range 18 to 93 years (mean 66). All data was retrospectively analysed by two nuclear\nmedicine physicians and classified as findings consistent with CTEPH or inconsistent with CTEPH. These\nclassifications were independently and collectively correlated with a final diagnosis of CTEPH or no\nCTEPH.\nResults: The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of V/Q for detection of CTEPH was 83.5%, 57.5% and\n97.7% respectively, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 93.1% and a negative predictive value (NPV)\nof 80.8% when only high probability reports were considered CTEPH positive. The accuracy, sensitivity,\nand specificity of V/Q for detection of CTEPH was 96.2%, 97.9% and 95.4% respectively, with a PPV of\n92.0% and a NPV of 98.8% when both high probability and intermediate probability reports were considered\nCTEPH positive. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of CTPA for detection of CTEPH were 70.7%,\n19.2% and 98.8% respectively, with 90% PPV and 69.1% NPV. All 47 CTEPH studies were reported as\nhaving abnormal lung perfusion.\nConclusion: This investigation has shown that V/Q is a more valuable diagnostic imaging tool in detecting\nCTEPH than CTPA. In suspected CTEPH, a high/intermediate V/Q report is consistent with a positive\ndiagnosis. This is an important finding as CTEPH is a potentially treatable condition.","PeriodicalId":373809,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Sciences","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31487/j.jnmrs.2020.01.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The diagnostic approach for patients with suspected Chronic Thrombo-Embolic Pulmonary Hypertension (CTEPH) is a combination of clinical and pre-test probability assessment, and diagnostic imaging of computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) or lung ventilation and perfusion scintigraphy (V/Q). There is a paucity of literature, particularly for Southeast Asia (SEA) populations, regarding the efficacy of these imaging approaches. This study investigated the sensitivity and specificity of V/Q and CTPA in the diagnosis of CTEPH. Methods: A retrospective analysis was undertaken on 133 consecutive patients presenting for pulmonary hypertension (PH). The population included 42 males, 91 females, 683 V/Q images and 6288 CTPA images for patients in the age range 18 to 93 years (mean 66). All data was retrospectively analysed by two nuclear medicine physicians and classified as findings consistent with CTEPH or inconsistent with CTEPH. These classifications were independently and collectively correlated with a final diagnosis of CTEPH or no CTEPH. Results: The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of V/Q for detection of CTEPH was 83.5%, 57.5% and 97.7% respectively, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 93.1% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 80.8% when only high probability reports were considered CTEPH positive. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of V/Q for detection of CTEPH was 96.2%, 97.9% and 95.4% respectively, with a PPV of 92.0% and a NPV of 98.8% when both high probability and intermediate probability reports were considered CTEPH positive. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of CTPA for detection of CTEPH were 70.7%, 19.2% and 98.8% respectively, with 90% PPV and 69.1% NPV. All 47 CTEPH studies were reported as having abnormal lung perfusion. Conclusion: This investigation has shown that V/Q is a more valuable diagnostic imaging tool in detecting CTEPH than CTPA. In suspected CTEPH, a high/intermediate V/Q report is consistent with a positive diagnosis. This is an important finding as CTEPH is a potentially treatable condition.
通气灌注肺扫描和计算机断层肺血管造影对慢性血栓栓塞性肺动脉高压的疗效
对疑似慢性血栓栓塞性肺动脉高压(CTEPH)患者的诊断方法是结合临床和测试前概率评估,以及计算机断层肺血管造影(CTPA)或肺通气和灌注成像(V/Q)的诊断成像。关于这些成像方法的有效性,文献很少,特别是东南亚(SEA)人群。本研究探讨了V/Q和CTPA在CTEPH诊断中的敏感性和特异性。方法:对133例连续出现肺动脉高压(PH)的患者进行回顾性分析。患者年龄18 ~ 93岁(平均66岁),男性42人,女性91人,V/Q图像683张,CTPA图像6288张。两名核医学医生对所有数据进行回顾性分析,并将其分类为与CTEPH一致或不一致的发现。这些分类与CTEPH或noCTEPH的最终诊断是独立和共同相关的。结果:V/Q法检测CTEPH的准确性、敏感性和特异性分别为83.5%、57.5%和97.7%,仅高概率报告为CTEPH阳性时,阳性预测值(PPV)为93.1%,阴性预测值(NPV)为80.8%。V/Q法检测CTEPH的准确性、敏感性和特异性分别为96.2%、97.9%和95.4%,当高概率和中概率报告均为CTEPH阳性时,PPV为92.0%,NPV为98.8%。CTPA检测CTEPH的准确性、敏感性和特异性分别为70.7%、19.2%和98.8%,PPV为90%,NPV为69.1%。所有47例CTEPH研究报告均有异常肺灌注。结论:与CTPA相比,V/Q是一种更有价值的cteph诊断成像工具。在疑似CTEPH中,高/中等V/Q报告与阳性诊断一致。这是一个重要的发现,因为CTEPH是一种潜在的可治疗的疾病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信