These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: Comparison of dual-energy computed tomography and single photon emission computed tomography in canines.
    Author: Tang CX, Yang GF, Schoepf UJ, Han ZH, Qi L, Zhao YE, Wu J, Zhou CS, Zhu H, Stubenrauch AC, Mangold S, Zhang LJ, Lu GM.
    Journal: Eur J Radiol; 2016 Feb; 85(2):498-506. PubMed ID: 26781157.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare diagnostic accuracy between dual-energy CT lung perfused blood volume (Lung PBV) imaging and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in detecting chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) with histopathological results as reference standard in a canine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen CTEPH canines were included into this experimental study. All procedures including paracentesis, embolization, scanning, pressure measurement and feeding medicine were repeated each two weeks, until systolic/diastolic pressure in canines was ≥ 30/15 mm Hg or mean pulmonary artery pressure ≥ 20 mm Hg, and then sacrificed for histopathology examination. Two radiologists (readers 1 and 2) and two nuclear radiologists (readers 3 and 4) analyzed images of conventional CT pulmonary angiography in dual-energy CT mode, Lung PBV imaging and SPECT, respectively. The presence, numbers, and locations of pulmonary emboli (PE) were recorded on a per-lobe basis. Pathological examination was served as reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of Lung PBV and SPECT were calculated. Kappa statistics were used to quantify inter-reader agreement. RESULTS: With histopathological results as reference standard, the sensitivities of 72.2%, 78.8%, 81.2%, specificities of 75.9%, 87.5%, 84.8%, accuracies of 73.8%, 83.1%, 83.1%, for readers 1, 2 and both with Lung PBV, respectively. Readers 3, 4 and both had sensitivities of 14.3%, 25.7%, 33.3%, specificities of 90.0%, 86.7%, 93.3%, accuracies of 49.2%, 53.8%, 60.0% with SPECT for detecting CTEPH. Inter-reader agreements were good for dual-energy CT (kappa=0.662) and SPECT (k=0.706) for detecting CTEPH. CONCLUSION: Dual-energy CT had a higher accuracy to detect CTEPH than SPECT in this canine model study.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]