|
|
|||||||||
Continuing Education |
1 Departments of Internal Medicine and Research and Advanced Studies Program, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan; 2 Departments of Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, New York, New York; 3 Office of the Dean, Weill Cornell Medical College and Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas; 4 Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; 5 Department of Radiology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri; 6 Department of Radiology, New York University, New York, New York; 7 Department of Radiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan; 8 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; 9 Department of Internal Medicine, St. Joseph Mercy Oakland, Pontiac, Michigan; 10 Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; 11 Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; 12 Department of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; 13 Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; and 14 Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Paul D. Stein, Michigan State University, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Venous Thromboembolism Research Unit, St. Joseph Mercy–Oakland Hospital, 44405 Woodward Ave., Pontiac, MI 48341-5023. E-mail: steinp{at}trinity-health.org
The purpose of this review was to evaluate the accuracy of SPECT in acute pulmonary embolism. Sparse data are available on the accuracy of SPECT based on an objective reference test. Several investigations were reported in which the reference standard for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism was based in part on the results of SPECT or planar ventilation–perfusion (V/Q) imaging. The sensitivity of SPECT in all but one investigation was at least 90%, and specificity also was generally at least 90%. The sensitivity of SPECT in 4 of 5 investigations was higher than that of planar V/Q imaging. The specificity of SPECT was generally higher, equal, or only somewhat lower than that of planar V/Q imaging. Most investigators reported nondiagnostic SPECT V/Q scans in no more than 3% of cases. Methods of obtaining SPECT images, methods of obtaining planar V/Q images, and the criteria for interpretation varied. The general impression is that SPECT is more advantageous than planar V/Q imaging.
Key Words: pulmonary embolism venous thromboembolic disease pulmonary scintigraphy SPECT ventilation–perfusion lung scan Technegas
* NOTE: FOR CE CREDIT, YOU CAN ACCESS THIS ACTIVITY THROUGH THE SNM WEB SITE (http://www.snm.org/ce_online) THROUGH DECEMBER 2010.
The authors of this article have indicated no relevant relationships that could be perceived as a real or apparent conflict of interest.
COPYRIGHT © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.
Related articles in JNM:
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. A. Parker Improving Lung Scintigraphy J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2009; 50(12): 1919 - 1920. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | RSS | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY | THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE |