Multidetector computed tomography for the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism

Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 384-388

  Stein, Paul D ^a,b   Hull, Russell D ^c  

^a ST JOSEPH MERCY OAKLAND HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Computed tomography angiography; Computed tomography venography; D dimer; Deep venous thrombosis; Pulmonary embolism; Venous thromboembolism

Indexed keywords

D DIMER;

ACUTE DISEASE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; ENZYME LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; HUMAN; LUNG EMBOLISM; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PHLEBOGRAPHY; REVIEW;

ACUTE DISEASE; ANGIOGRAPHY; CONTRAST MEDIA; HUMANS; PHLEBOGRAPHY; PULMONARY EMBOLISM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 34748849544     PISSN: 10705287     EISSN: 15316971     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MCP.0b013e32821acdbe     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Stein PD, Kayali F, Olson RE. Trends in the use of diagnostic imaging in patients hospitalized with acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Cardiol 2004; 93:1316-1317.
2. Stein PD, Fowler SE, Goodman LR, et al. Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:2317-2327. Prospective multicenter investigation of accuracy of multidetector CT angiography alone and combined with venous phase imaging for diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism. Includes 824 patients with reference diagnosis and completed CT study.
3. Coche E, Verschuren F, Keyeux A, et al. Diagnosis of acute pulmonaryembolism in outpatients: comparison of thin-collimation multidetector row spiral CT and planar ventilation perfusion scintigraphy. Radiol 2003; 229:757-765.
4. Winer-Muram HT, Rydberg J, Johnson MS, et al. Suspected acute pulmonary embolism: evaluation with multidetector row CT versus digital subtraction pulmonary arteriography. Radiology 2004; 233:806-815.
5. Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, et al. Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside without diagnostic imaging: management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism presenting to theemergency department by using a simple clinical model and D-dimer. Ann Intern Med 2001; 135:98-107.
6. Eisner MD. Before diagnostic testing for pulmonary embolism: estimating the prior probability of disease. Am J Med 2003; 114:232-234.
7. Sackett DL. Bias in analytic research. J Chronic Dis 1979; 32:51-63.
8. Gottschalk A, Stein PD, Goodman LR, Sostman HD. Overview of prospective investigation of pulmonary embolism diagnosis II. Semin Nucl Med 2002; 32:173-182.
9. Begemann PG, Bonacker M, Kemper J, et al. Evaluation of the deep venous system in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism with multidetector CT: a prospective study in comparison to Doppler sonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2003; 27:399-409.
10. Richman PB, Wood J, Kasper DM, et al. Contribution of indirect computed tomography venography to computed tomography angiography of the chest for the diagnosis of thromboembolic disease in two United States emergency departments. J Thromb Haemost 2003; 1:652-657.
11. Revel MP, Petrover D, Hernigou A, et al. Diagnosing pulmonary embolism with four-detector row helical CT: prospective evaluation of 216 outpatients and inpatients. Radiology 2005; 234:265-273.
12. Ghaye B, Nchimi A, Noukoua C, Dondelinger RF. Does multidetector row CT pulmonary angiography reduce the incremental value of indirect CT venography compared with single-detector row CT pulmonary angiography? Radiology 2006; 240:256-262.
13. Johnson JC, Brown MD, McCullough N, Smith S. CT lower extremity venography in suspected pulmonary embolism in the ED. Emerg Radiol 2006; 12:160-163.
14. Wells PS, Ginsberg JS, Anderson DR, et al. Use of a clinical model for safe management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Intern Med 1998; 129:997-1005.
15. Sanson BJ, Lijmer JG, Mac Gillavry MR, et al. Comparison of a clinical probability estimate and two clinical models in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. ANTELOPE-Study Group. Thromb Haemost 2000; 83:199-203.
16. Wells PS, AndersonDR, Rodger M, et al. Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED D-Dimer. Thromb Haemost 2000; 83:416-420.
17. Chagnon I, Bounameaux H, Aujesky D, et al. Comparison of two clinical prediction rules and implicit assessment among patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Am J Med 2002; 113:269-275.
18. Wicki J, Perneger TV, Junod AF, et al. Assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism in the emergency ward: a simple score. Arch Intern Med 2001; 161:92-97.
19. Le Gal G, Righini M, Roy PM, et al. Prediction of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: the revised Geneva score. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144:165-171.
20. A Collaborative Study by the PIOPED Investigators. Value of the ventilation/perfusion scan in acute pulmonary embolism: results of the Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis (PIOPED). J Am Med Assoc 1990; 263:2753-2759.
21. Stein PD, Beemath A, Goodman LR, et al. Outcome studies of pulmonary embolism versus accuracy: they do not equate. Thromb Haemost 2006; 96:107-108.
22. Remy-Jardin M, Tillie-Leblond I, Szapiro D, et al. CT angiography of pulmonary embolism in patients with underlying respiratory disease; impact of multislice CT on image quality and negative predictive value. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:1971-1978.
23. Kavanagh EC, O'Hare A, Hargaden G, Murray JG. Risk of pulmonary embolism after negative MDCT pulmonary angiography findings. Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:499-504.
24. Perrier A, Roy PM, Aujesky D, et al. Diagnosing pulmonary embolism in outpatients with clinical assessment, D-dimer measurement, venous ultrasound, and helical computed tomography: a multicenter management study. Am J Med 2004; 116:291-299.
25. Perrier A, Roy PM, Sanchez O, et al. Multidetector-low computed tomography in suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:1760-1768.
26. Prologo JD, Gilkeson RC, Diaz M, Cummings M. The effect of single-detector CT versus MDCT on clinical outcomes in patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism and negative results on CT pulmonary angiography. Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:1231-1235.
27. van Belle A, Buller HR, Huisman MV, et al., Christopher Study Investigators. Effectiveness of managing suspected pulmonary embolism using an algorithm combining clinical probability, D-dimer testing, and computed tomography. JAMA 2006; 295:172-179.
28. Stein PD, Woodard PK, Weg JG, et al. Diagnostic pathways in acute pulmonary embolism: recommendations of the PIOPED II investigators. Am J Med 2006; 119:1048-1055. Gives detailed recommendations and optional pathways for diagnostic evaluation according to clinical probability. Alternative pathways of diagnosis are described for women of reproductive age, patients with poor renal function, patients with allergy to contrast agents, pregnant patients, and patients in extremis.
29. Stein PD, Hull RD, Pineo G. Strategy that includes serial noninvasive leg tests for diagnosis of thromboembolic disease in patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism based on data from PIOPED. Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis. Arch Intern Med 1995; 155:2101-2104.
30. Buller HR, Agnelli G, Hull RD, et al. Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest 2004; 126 (Suppl):401S-428S.
31. Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, Bell C, et al. ACR guidance document for safe MR practices: 2007. Am J Roentgen 2007; 188:1-27.