Lowe V J, Bullard A G, Coleman R E
Department of Nuclear Medicine, St. Louis University Medical Center, Missouri 63110, USA.
Clin Nucl Med. 1995 Dec;20(12):1079-83. doi: 10.1097/00003072-199512000-00009.
The criteria used in the Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis (PIOPED) study for the interpretation of ventilation/perfusion scans are widely used and the probability of pulmonary embolism is determined from these criteria. The prevalence of pulmonary embolism in the PIOPED study was 33%. To investigate the similarity of patient populations who have ventilation/perfusion scans at one of the medical centers that participated in the PIOPED study and a small community hospital, the authors evaluated the probability category distributions of lung scans at the two institutions. They retrospectively interpreted 54 and 49 ventilation/perfusion lung scans selected from January, 1991, to June, 1992, at Duke University Medical Center and at Central Carolina Hospital, respectively. Studies were interpreted according to the PIOPED criteria. The percentage of studies assigned to each category at Duke University Medical Center and Central Carolina Hospital were 17% and 27% normal or very low probability, 31% and 59% low probability, 39% and 10% intermediate probability, and 13% and 4% high probability, respectively. The different distribution of probability categories between university and community hospitals suggests that the prevalence of disease may also be different. The post-test probability of pulmonary embolism is related to the prevalence of disease and the sensitivity and specificity of the ventilation/perfusion scan. Because these variables may differ in community hospital settings, the post-test probability of pulmonary embolism as determined by data from the PIOPED study should only be used in institutions with similar populations. Clinical management based upon the results of the PIOPED study may not be applicable to patients who have ventilation/perfusion scans performed in a community hospital.
“肺栓塞诊断前瞻性调查(PIOPED)”研究中用于解读通气/灌注扫描的标准被广泛应用,且根据这些标准来确定肺栓塞的可能性。PIOPED研究中肺栓塞的患病率为33%。为了调查在参与PIOPED研究的某医学中心和一家小型社区医院进行通气/灌注扫描的患者群体的相似性,作者评估了这两家机构肺部扫描的可能性类别分布。他们分别回顾性解读了1991年1月至1992年6月在杜克大学医学中心和卡罗来纳中部医院选取的54例和49例通气/灌注肺部扫描。研究按照PIOPED标准进行解读。在杜克大学医学中心和卡罗来纳中部医院,分配到各可能性类别的研究百分比分别为:正常或极低可能性17%和27%,低可能性31%和59%,中度可能性39%和10%,高可能性13%和4%。大学医院和社区医院可能性类别分布不同,这表明疾病的患病率可能也不同。肺栓塞的检验后概率与疾病的患病率以及通气/灌注扫描的敏感性和特异性相关。由于这些变量在社区医院环境中可能不同,PIOPED研究数据所确定的肺栓塞检验后概率仅应在人群相似的机构中使用。基于PIOPED研究结果的临床管理可能不适用于在社区医院进行通气/灌注扫描的患者。