Comparison of Different Imaging Examination for Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism

毛仙芝,黄中柯,楼岑,李浦,陈亮
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-3686.2008.06.012
2008-01-01
Abstract:Objective To compare the clinical significances of different imaging examinations for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism(PE). Methods Sixty three patients suspected to PE were examined respectively by different imaging examination such as chest X-ray, cardiac ultrasonograph, CTPA, and pulmonary V/P scintigraphy, some of which were also examined with MRPA and PGA. Clinical significances of different imaging examinations for PE diagnosis were evaluated. Results The sensitivity of chest X-ray, cardiac ultrasonograph, pulmonary V/P scintigraphy and CTPA, as well as MRPA and PGA were 43.48%, 54.35%, 95.65%, 95.45%, 87.10% and 97.50%, respectively. While the specificity of them were 35.29%, 76.47%, 94.12%, 93.75%, 92.31% and 100.00%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity had no significant difference between pulmonary V/P scintigraphy, CTPA and PGA(χ2=2.13, 3.36,P0.05). The sensitivity and specificity had significant difference between chest X-ray, cardiac ultrasonograph, and PGA(χ2=19.87, 26.73, P0.05). Conclusion Chest X-ray and cardiac ultrasonograph can only be used as a screening examination. It is considered to replace PGA with pulmonary V/P scintigraphy and CTPA, or MRPA.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?