Gottschalk A, Stein P D, Henry J W
Michigan State University, Department of Radiology, East Lansing 48824-1313, USA.
J Nucl Med. 1996 Apr;37(4):570-2.
The purpose of this investigation is to provide further evidence in support of the interpretation of ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) lung scans on the basis of criteria dependent on whether or not the patient has prior cardiopulmonary disease (CPD).
Data are from the collaborative PIOPED study. We evaluated the original PIOPED database to obtain the consensus probability estimates of pulmonary embolism (PE) among patients stratified according to the presence or absence of prior CPD.
Among patients with no prior CPD, nuclear physicians consistently underestimated the probability of PE (odds ratio 1.62, 95% confidence interval 1.10-2.38, p = .014).
Past experience guided nuclear physicians into correctly estimating the probability of acute PE on V/Q scans of patients with prior CPD. The criteria they subjectively used was inadequate for estimating the probability of acute PE in patients with no prior CPD. Different criteria, therefore, apply to the interpretation of V/Q scans in these two groups.
本研究的目的是提供进一步的证据，以支持根据患者是否患有既往心肺疾病（CPD）制定的标准来解释通气/灌注（V/Q）肺扫描结果。
数据来自合作的PIOPED研究。我们评估了原始的PIOPED数据库，以获得根据是否存在既往CPD分层的患者中肺栓塞（PE）的共识概率估计值。
在无既往CPD的患者中，核医学医师一直低估了PE的概率（优势比1.62，95%置信区间1.10 - 2.38，p = 0.014）。
既往经验指导核医学医师正确估计既往有CPD患者V/Q扫描中急性PE的概率。他们主观使用的标准不足以估计无既往CPD患者急性PE的概率。因此，这两组患者V/Q扫描结果的解释应采用不同的标准。
