HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Morrell, N.W. Articles by Seed, W.A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Morrell, N.W. Articles by Seed, W.A.

The Underestimation of Segmental Defect Size in Radionuclide Lung Scanning

Departments of Medicine and Nuclear Medicine, Charing Cross and Westminster Medical School, London, United Kingdom

Correspondence: For reprints or correspondence contact: Dr. NW. Morrell, Department of Medicine, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, London, United Kingdom, W68RF.

ABSTRACT

Criteria used to place ventilation-perfusion lung scans into categories with different probabilities for pulmonary embolism depend largely on the size and anatomical distribution of defects recognized. These criteria assume that actual segmental defects appear segmental on the lung scan. This study examined the accuracy with which four experienced observers were able to estimate the size of defects of known anatomical location and size, using images of segmental defects in ventilation produced with a bronchoscopic technique and ^81mKr. Of the 24 segmental defects produced in this study, 17% were interpreted as being <25% of a segment; 23% were interpreted as being 25%–50% of a segment; 17% were interpreted as 50–75% of a segment; 40% were interpreted as being 75%–100% of a segment and 4% were interpreted as being > 100% of a segment. Intra- and interobserver agreement as assessed by the Kappa statistic varied with the number of size categories used but was generally poor. Underestimation of defect size observed in this study may explain why many patients with pulmonary embolism do not have high probability scans. We conclude that the subjective impression of the size of a defect on a lung scan is an unreliable indication of a defect's true segmental or subsegmental nature and that scoring systems based on these criteria should be viewed with caution.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Zaporozhan, S. Ley, K. K. Gast, J. Schmiedeskamp, A. Biedermann, B. Eberle, and H.-U. Kauczor Functional Analysis in Single-Lung Transplant Recipients: A Comparative Study of High-Resolution CT, 3He-MRI, and Pulmonary Function Tests Chest, January 1, 2004; 125(1): 173 - 181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Markstaller, H.-U. Kauczor, N. Weiler, J. Karmrodt, M. Doebrich, M. Ferrante, M. Thelen, and B. Eberle Lung density distribution in dynamic CT correlates with oxygenation in ventilated pigs with lavage ARDS{dagger} Br. J. Anaesth., November 1, 2003; 91(5): 699 - 708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. A. Meignan Lung Ventilation/Perfusion SPECT: The Right Technique for Hard Times J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2002; 43(5): 648 - 651. [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. J.C. Hartmann, P. J. Hagen, M. P.M. Stokkel, O. S. Hoekstra, and M. H. Prins Technegas Versus 81mKr Ventilation-Perfusion Scintigraphy: A Comparative Study in Patients with Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism J. Nucl. Med., March 1, 2001; 42(3): 393 - 400. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				A. Gottschalk New Criteria for Ventilation-Perfusion Lung Scan Interpretation: A Basis for Optimal Interaction with Helical CT Angiography RadioGraphics, July 1, 2000; 20(4): 1206 - 1210. [Full Text] [PDF]