Publications (2)3.17 Total impact
-
Article: Interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism on computed tomography chest angiography and indirect venography of the lower extremities in emergency department patients.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To determine interobserver agreement between radiologists for computed tomography (CT) angiography and venography. CT venography of the lower extremities combined with standard CT angiography of the chest may result in an increased overall diagnosis rate of venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep venous thrombosis). The study had a retrospective cohort design. The population consisted of emergency department patients who were evaluated for suspected pulmonary embolism. A random sample of 50 patients diagnosed and treated for venous thromboembolism and 50 age- and gender-matched patients whose CT angiograms and venograms were read as negative were enrolled. The original reading (R1) was compared with readings of two study radiologists: R2, a general radiologist, and R3, a radiologist with fellowship training in cross-sectional imaging. All readers were blinded to each other. Both R2 and R3 found both CT angiogram and venogram components technically adequate in 95% (95% CI = 89% to 98%) and 86% (95% CI = 78% to 92%) of studies, respectively. The agreement was very good for CT angiography (lowest agreement = 92%; lowest kappa = 0.83) and was good for CT venography (85%, kappa = 0.65). In nine cases, R1 read the CT angiogram as negative but the venogram as positive for DVT, whereas both R2 and R3 read both components as negative in four of these nine, suggesting a false-positive isolated DVT rate of 44% (95% CI = 19% to 73%). In no case did R1 read both scan components as negative when R2 and R3 agreed on presence of pulmonary embolism or DVT. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism on CT angiography is more reliable than diagnosis of isolated DVT on CT venography.Academic Emergency Medicine 04/2006; 13(3):295-301. · 1.86 Impact Factor -
Article: Electrocardiographic findings in Emergency Department patients with pulmonary embolism.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the pre-study, null hypothesis that there is no difference in the electrocardiogram (EKG) findings for Emergency Department (ED) patients who rule in vs. rule out for suspected pulmonary embolism, a retrospective review of a cohort of patients with pulmonary embolism and their controls was conducted in an academic, suburban ED. Patients who were evaluated in the ED during a one-year study period for symptoms suggestive of pulmonary embolism were eligible for inclusion. All patients with pulmonary embolism and sex- and age-matched controls comprised the final study groups. Two board-certified cardiologists reviewed each patient's EKG. There were 350 eligible patients identified; 49 patients with pulmonary embolism and 49 controls were entered into the study. The most common rhythm observed in both groups was normal sinus rhythm (67.3% cases vs. 68.6 % controls; p = 1.0). Abnormalities believed to be associated with pulmonary embolism occurred with similar frequency in both case and control groups (sinus tachycardia [18.8 % vs. 11.8%, respectively; p = 0.40]), incomplete right bundle branch block (4.2% vs. 0.0%, respectively; p = 0.24), complete right bundle branch block (4.2% vs. 6.0, respectively; p = 1.0), S1Q3T3 pattern (2.1 vs. 0.0, respectively; p = 0.49), S1Q3 pattern (0.0 vs. 0.0), and extreme right axis (0.0 vs. 0.0). New EKG changes were identified more frequently for patients with pulmonary embolism (33.3% vs. 12.5% controls; p = 0.03), but specific findings were rarely different between cases and controls. In our cohort of ED patients, we did not identify EKG features that are likely to help distinguish patients with pulmonary embolism from those who rule out for the disease.Journal of Emergency Medicine 09/2004; 27(2):121-6. · 1.31 Impact Factor
