Article

Impact of reliance on CT pulmonary angiography on diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A Bayesian analysis

Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143-0131, USA.
Journal of Hospital Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.08). 03/2006; 1(2):81-7. DOI: 10.1002/jhm.71
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Spiral computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) has become the primary test used to investigate suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) at many institutions, despite uncertainty regarding its sensitivity and specificity. Although CTPA-based diagnostic algorithms focus on minimizing the false-negative rate, we hypothesized that increasing use of CTPA also might lead to false-positive diagnoses.
Determine the frequency of possible false-positive diagnoses of PE when CTPA is the primary diagnostic test.
Retrospective cohort study.
Two academic teaching hospitals.
322 patients with suspected PE evaluated with CTPA.
We used a validated prediction rule to determine the pretest probability of PE in each patient. We combined these pretest probabilities with published estimates of CTPA test characteristics to generate expected posttest probabilities of PE. We compared these posttest probabilities to actual treatment decisions to determine the rate of false-positive diagnoses of PE.
Among 322 patients investigated for PE, 37 (12%) had high pretest probability, 101 (32%) moderate, and 184 (57%) low. CT scans were interpreted as positive for PE in 57 patients (17.8%). Regardless of the pretest probability of PE, 96.5% of patients with a positive CTPA were treated with anticoagulants. Even under an optimistic assumption of CTPA test characteristics, as many as 25.4% of these patients may have been treated unnecessarily as a result of a false-positive diagnosis. Most of these patients had a low pretest probability of PE.
Failure to utilize Bayesian reasoning when interpreting CTPA may lead to false-positive diagnoses of pulmonary embolism in a substantial proportion of patients.

0 Followers
 · 
64 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pulmonary embolism (PE), a medical emergency for pulmonary physicians, is defined as a blockage of the main artery of the lung or one of its branches by embolism from many sources, such as thrombus, air, amniotic fluid, tumor and fat. A good clinician, especially pulmonary or critical care physician, should consider the possible diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in a highly suspected patient since prompt diagnosis and treatment can dramatically reduce the morbidity and mortality of this disease. Due to the nonspecific signs and symptoms of PE, imaging techniques have been recognized as the major method for physicians in diagnosis. Nowadays, computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), with high sensitivity and specificity, has become the golden standard in PE diagnosis. Combined application of CTPA and ventilation/perfusion lung scan (V/Q scan) can further yield a definite diagnosis in 90%-99% suspected patients. However, false-positive CTPA manifestation of PE may also mislead physicians in diagnosis. Here, we report a case who was misdiagnosed of PE after radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) because of a combined indication of filling defect on CTPA and VQ scan in left main pulmonary artery, both of which mimic massive PE.
    Respiratory care 02/2011; 56(6):874-7. DOI:10.4187/respcare.00975 · 1.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this article, the authors review the role of the different imaging modalities in the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected acute or chronic pulmonary embolism (PE). The authors also discuss the current guidelines for the diagnosis of acute PE based on the pretest probability clinical assessment and outline the current recommendations for special patient populations. The recent guidelines from the American Thoracic Society/Society of Thoracic Radiology for the assessment of suspected PE in pregnancy are also reviewed. Finally, the imaging findings in acute and chronic PE are illustrated.
    12/2012; 33(6):500-21. DOI:10.1053/j.sult.2012.06.001
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT) pulmonary angiography use has increased dramatically, raising concerns for patient safety. Adherence to recommendations and guidelines may protect patients. We measured adherence to the recommendations of Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis (PIOPED II) investigators for evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism and the rate of potential false-positive pulmonary embolism diagnoses when recommendations of PIOPED II investigators were not followed. METHODS: We used a structured record review to identify 3500 consecutive CT pulmonary angiograms performed to investigate suspected pulmonary embolism in 2 urban emergency departments, calculating the revised Geneva score (RGS) to classify patients as "pulmonary embolism unlikely" (RGS≤10) or "pulmonary embolism likely" (RGS>10). CT pulmonary angiograms were concordant with PIOPED II investigator recommendations if pulmonary embolism was likely or pulmonary embolism was unlikely and a highly sensitive D-dimer test result was positive. We independently reviewed 482 CT pulmonary angiograms to measure the rate of potential false-positive pulmonary embolism diagnoses. RESULTS: A total of 1592 of 3500 CT pulmonary angiograms (45.5%) followed the recommendations of PIOPED II investigators. The remaining 1908 CT pulmonary angiograms were performed on patients with an RGS≤10 without a D-dimer test (n=1588) or after a negative D-dimer test result (n=320). The overall rate of pulmonary embolism was 9.7%. Potential false-positive diagnoses of pulmonary embolism occurred in 2 of 3 patients with an RGS≤10 and a negative D-dimer test result. CONCLUSIONS: Nonadherence to recommendations for CT pulmonary angiography is common and exposes patients to increased risks, including potential false-positive diagnoses of pulmonary embolism.
    The American journal of medicine 11/2012; DOI:10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.05.028 · 5.30 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
2 Downloads