Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review

Background Ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) single‐photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has largely replaced conventional planar V/Q scan in nuclear medicine departments for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, the diagnostic performance of the test and its role in the diagnostic management...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis 2020-11, Vol.18 (11), p.2910-2920
Hauptverfasser: Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves, Robin, Philippe, Tromeur, Cécile, Davis, Alexandra, Robert‐Ebadi, Helia, Carrier, Marc, Le Gal, Grégoire, Salaun, Pierre‐Yves
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2920
container_issue 11
container_start_page 2910
container_title Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis
container_volume 18
creator Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves
Robin, Philippe
Tromeur, Cécile
Davis, Alexandra
Robert‐Ebadi, Helia
Carrier, Marc
Le Gal, Grégoire
Salaun, Pierre‐Yves
description Background Ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) single‐photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has largely replaced conventional planar V/Q scan in nuclear medicine departments for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, the diagnostic performance of the test and its role in the diagnostic management of acute PE are still a matter of debate. Objective The primary aim was to establish the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity) of V/Q SPECT for PE diagnosis. The secondary aim was to review the clinical outcomes of patients investigated for PE suspicion with a standardized algorithm based on V/Q SPECT. Methods We conducted a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and management outcome studies involving patients evaluated with V/Q SPECT for suspected acute PE. We searched from inception to June 23, 2020, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for diagnostic accuracy studies, randomized controlled trials, and observational cohort studies. The methodological quality and risk of bias of eligible studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies‐2 (QUADAS‐2) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tools. Results We identified 13 accuracy studies and one prospective outcome study. Eleven diagnostic accuracy studies were deemed at high risk of bias in at least two of the four domains of QUADAS‐2 evaluation and a further two studies raised concerns regarding the applicability of results, precluding the meta‐analysis for accuracy indices. The only prospective cohort study demonstrated critical risk of bias. Conclusions Although V/Q SPECT has been widely implemented in daily clinical practice, the exact diagnostic performance of V/Q SPECT for PE is still unknown. This systematic review clearly identifies knowledge gaps and sets the agenda for future research.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/jth.15038
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2477263967</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2455518465</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-7333997ae50fee09047c4ea3fc4e9b726ed8fa9fdc5a32a074356acd7e18f5c43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMotlYP_gEJeNFD26Sz2Q9vpVSrCApW8bakuxObsrupya6l_97YDw-Cc5iZw8PDzEvIOWc97qu_qOc9LhjEB6TNBcTdKIbwcL8nAC1y4tyCMZ6IATsmLYAAgAneJu9vWNW6kLU2VX-JVjXOb_TleTyaUmUsredIcy0_KuO0o0bRZVOUppJ2TbGcmUK78oYOqVu7GkuvyajFL42rU3KkZOHwbDc75PV2PB1Nuo9Pd_ej4WM3g811AJAkkUTBFCJLWBBlAUpQviezaBBiHiuZqDwTEgaSRQGIUGZ5hDxWIgugQ6623qU1nw26Oi21y7AoZIWmcekgiLwFkjDy6OUfdGEaW_nrPCWE4HEQCk9db6nMGucsqnRpden_TTlLf-JOfdzpJm7PXuyMzazE_Jfc5-uB_hZY6QLX_5vSh-lkq_wGS_qJYA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2455518465</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves ; Robin, Philippe ; Tromeur, Cécile ; Davis, Alexandra ; Robert‐Ebadi, Helia ; Carrier, Marc ; Le Gal, Grégoire ; Salaun, Pierre‐Yves</creator><creatorcontrib>Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves ; Robin, Philippe ; Tromeur, Cécile ; Davis, Alexandra ; Robert‐Ebadi, Helia ; Carrier, Marc ; Le Gal, Grégoire ; Salaun, Pierre‐Yves</creatorcontrib><description>Background Ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) single‐photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has largely replaced conventional planar V/Q scan in nuclear medicine departments for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, the diagnostic performance of the test and its role in the diagnostic management of acute PE are still a matter of debate. Objective The primary aim was to establish the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity) of V/Q SPECT for PE diagnosis. The secondary aim was to review the clinical outcomes of patients investigated for PE suspicion with a standardized algorithm based on V/Q SPECT. Methods We conducted a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and management outcome studies involving patients evaluated with V/Q SPECT for suspected acute PE. We searched from inception to June 23, 2020, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for diagnostic accuracy studies, randomized controlled trials, and observational cohort studies. The methodological quality and risk of bias of eligible studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies‐2 (QUADAS‐2) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tools. Results We identified 13 accuracy studies and one prospective outcome study. Eleven diagnostic accuracy studies were deemed at high risk of bias in at least two of the four domains of QUADAS‐2 evaluation and a further two studies raised concerns regarding the applicability of results, precluding the meta‐analysis for accuracy indices. The only prospective cohort study demonstrated critical risk of bias. Conclusions Although V/Q SPECT has been widely implemented in daily clinical practice, the exact diagnostic performance of V/Q SPECT for PE is still unknown. This systematic review clearly identifies knowledge gaps and sets the agenda for future research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1538-7933</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1538-7836</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-7836</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jth.15038</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33433051</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Limited</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Bias ; Clinical trials ; Computed tomography ; Diagnosis ; diagnostic accuracy ; Embolism ; Humans ; Lung ; lung scintigraphy ; Nuclear medicine ; Perfusion ; Prospective Studies ; pulmonary embolism ; Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging ; Pulmonary embolisms ; Quality control ; Single photon emission computed tomography ; Systematic review ; Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon ; V/Q SPECT ; Ventilation</subject><ispartof>Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis, 2020-11, Vol.18 (11), p.2910-2920</ispartof><rights>2020 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis</rights><rights>2020 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-7333997ae50fee09047c4ea3fc4e9b726ed8fa9fdc5a32a074356acd7e18f5c43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-7333997ae50fee09047c4ea3fc4e9b726ed8fa9fdc5a32a074356acd7e18f5c43</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8534-8203</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33433051$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robin, Philippe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tromeur, Cécile</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robert‐Ebadi, Helia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrier, Marc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le Gal, Grégoire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salaun, Pierre‐Yves</creatorcontrib><title>Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review</title><title>Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis</title><addtitle>J Thromb Haemost</addtitle><description>Background Ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) single‐photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has largely replaced conventional planar V/Q scan in nuclear medicine departments for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, the diagnostic performance of the test and its role in the diagnostic management of acute PE are still a matter of debate. Objective The primary aim was to establish the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity) of V/Q SPECT for PE diagnosis. The secondary aim was to review the clinical outcomes of patients investigated for PE suspicion with a standardized algorithm based on V/Q SPECT. Methods We conducted a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and management outcome studies involving patients evaluated with V/Q SPECT for suspected acute PE. We searched from inception to June 23, 2020, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for diagnostic accuracy studies, randomized controlled trials, and observational cohort studies. The methodological quality and risk of bias of eligible studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies‐2 (QUADAS‐2) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tools. Results We identified 13 accuracy studies and one prospective outcome study. Eleven diagnostic accuracy studies were deemed at high risk of bias in at least two of the four domains of QUADAS‐2 evaluation and a further two studies raised concerns regarding the applicability of results, precluding the meta‐analysis for accuracy indices. The only prospective cohort study demonstrated critical risk of bias. Conclusions Although V/Q SPECT has been widely implemented in daily clinical practice, the exact diagnostic performance of V/Q SPECT for PE is still unknown. This systematic review clearly identifies knowledge gaps and sets the agenda for future research.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>diagnostic accuracy</subject><subject>Embolism</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lung</subject><subject>lung scintigraphy</subject><subject>Nuclear medicine</subject><subject>Perfusion</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>pulmonary embolism</subject><subject>Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pulmonary embolisms</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Single photon emission computed tomography</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon</subject><subject>V/Q SPECT</subject><subject>Ventilation</subject><issn>1538-7933</issn><issn>1538-7836</issn><issn>1538-7836</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMotlYP_gEJeNFD26Sz2Q9vpVSrCApW8bakuxObsrupya6l_97YDw-Cc5iZw8PDzEvIOWc97qu_qOc9LhjEB6TNBcTdKIbwcL8nAC1y4tyCMZ6IATsmLYAAgAneJu9vWNW6kLU2VX-JVjXOb_TleTyaUmUsredIcy0_KuO0o0bRZVOUppJ2TbGcmUK78oYOqVu7GkuvyajFL42rU3KkZOHwbDc75PV2PB1Nuo9Pd_ej4WM3g811AJAkkUTBFCJLWBBlAUpQviezaBBiHiuZqDwTEgaSRQGIUGZ5hDxWIgugQ6623qU1nw26Oi21y7AoZIWmcekgiLwFkjDy6OUfdGEaW_nrPCWE4HEQCk9db6nMGucsqnRpden_TTlLf-JOfdzpJm7PXuyMzazE_Jfc5-uB_hZY6QLX_5vSh-lkq_wGS_qJYA</recordid><startdate>202011</startdate><enddate>202011</enddate><creator>Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves</creator><creator>Robin, Philippe</creator><creator>Tromeur, Cécile</creator><creator>Davis, Alexandra</creator><creator>Robert‐Ebadi, Helia</creator><creator>Carrier, Marc</creator><creator>Le Gal, Grégoire</creator><creator>Salaun, Pierre‐Yves</creator><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8534-8203</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202011</creationdate><title>Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review</title><author>Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves ; Robin, Philippe ; Tromeur, Cécile ; Davis, Alexandra ; Robert‐Ebadi, Helia ; Carrier, Marc ; Le Gal, Grégoire ; Salaun, Pierre‐Yves</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3538-7333997ae50fee09047c4ea3fc4e9b726ed8fa9fdc5a32a074356acd7e18f5c43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>diagnostic accuracy</topic><topic>Embolism</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lung</topic><topic>lung scintigraphy</topic><topic>Nuclear medicine</topic><topic>Perfusion</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>pulmonary embolism</topic><topic>Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pulmonary embolisms</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Single photon emission computed tomography</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon</topic><topic>V/Q SPECT</topic><topic>Ventilation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robin, Philippe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tromeur, Cécile</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robert‐Ebadi, Helia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrier, Marc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le Gal, Grégoire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salaun, Pierre‐Yves</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Le Roux, Pierre‐Yves</au><au>Robin, Philippe</au><au>Tromeur, Cécile</au><au>Davis, Alexandra</au><au>Robert‐Ebadi, Helia</au><au>Carrier, Marc</au><au>Le Gal, Grégoire</au><au>Salaun, Pierre‐Yves</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review</atitle><jtitle>Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis</jtitle><addtitle>J Thromb Haemost</addtitle><date>2020-11</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>2910</spage><epage>2920</epage><pages>2910-2920</pages><issn>1538-7933</issn><issn>1538-7836</issn><eissn>1538-7836</eissn><abstract>Background Ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) single‐photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) has largely replaced conventional planar V/Q scan in nuclear medicine departments for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, the diagnostic performance of the test and its role in the diagnostic management of acute PE are still a matter of debate. Objective The primary aim was to establish the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity) of V/Q SPECT for PE diagnosis. The secondary aim was to review the clinical outcomes of patients investigated for PE suspicion with a standardized algorithm based on V/Q SPECT. Methods We conducted a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and management outcome studies involving patients evaluated with V/Q SPECT for suspected acute PE. We searched from inception to June 23, 2020, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for diagnostic accuracy studies, randomized controlled trials, and observational cohort studies. The methodological quality and risk of bias of eligible studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies‐2 (QUADAS‐2) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tools. Results We identified 13 accuracy studies and one prospective outcome study. Eleven diagnostic accuracy studies were deemed at high risk of bias in at least two of the four domains of QUADAS‐2 evaluation and a further two studies raised concerns regarding the applicability of results, precluding the meta‐analysis for accuracy indices. The only prospective cohort study demonstrated critical risk of bias. Conclusions Although V/Q SPECT has been widely implemented in daily clinical practice, the exact diagnostic performance of V/Q SPECT for PE is still unknown. This systematic review clearly identifies knowledge gaps and sets the agenda for future research.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Limited</pub><pmid>33433051</pmid><doi>10.1111/jth.15038</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8534-8203</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1538-7933
ispartof Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis, 2020-11, Vol.18 (11), p.2910-2920
issn 1538-7933
1538-7836
1538-7836
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2477263967
source MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Accuracy
Bias
Clinical trials
Computed tomography
Diagnosis
diagnostic accuracy
Embolism
Humans
Lung
lung scintigraphy
Nuclear medicine
Perfusion
Prospective Studies
pulmonary embolism
Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging
Pulmonary embolisms
Quality control
Single photon emission computed tomography
Systematic review
Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon
V/Q SPECT
Ventilation
title Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A systematic review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T22%3A47%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ventilation/perfusion%20SPECT%20for%20the%20diagnosis%20of%20pulmonary%20embolism:%20A%20systematic%20review&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20thrombosis%20and%20haemostasis&rft.au=Le%20Roux,%20Pierre%E2%80%90Yves&rft.date=2020-11&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=2910&rft.epage=2920&rft.pages=2910-2920&rft.issn=1538-7933&rft.eissn=1538-7836&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jth.15038&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2455518465%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2455518465&rft_id=info:pmid/33433051&rfr_iscdi=true