Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A H Oostdijk

Publications and source records attributed to A H Oostdijk.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Changes in perfusion scintigraphy in the first days of heparin therapy in patients with acute pulmonary embolism.

Patients with suspected pulmonary embolism often receive heparin therapy for hours to days before ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy is completed. We assessed to what extent the lung scan classification and pulmonary vascular perfusion changed over a period of 2-4 days of full anticoagulant therapy. In 312 consecutive patients with at least one segmental perfusion defect on the initial perfusion scan, classification of both the initial and the final lung scan allowed us to study alteration in scan classification. Changes in pulmonary perfusion were assessed scintigraphically in a subgroup of 64 patients with proven pulmonary embolism. Among 79 patients with an initial high-probability lung scan, the final scan remained high probability in 77 whereas it became non-diagnostic and normal in one patient each. The lung scan classification did not change in any of the 233 patients who initially had a non-diagnostic scan. Thus, a different lung scan category was observed in only 2 out of 312 patients (0.6%; 95% CI 0.1%-2.3%). The mean pulmonary perfusion at baseline in the subgroup of 64 patients with pulmonary embolism was 62% (SD +/-17%; range 26%-89%). A mean absolute improvement in pulmonary perfusion of only 4%+/-11% (NS) was observed in the 2-4 days of observation. It is concluded that intravenous heparin therapy for a period of 2-4 days has only a minimal influence on the diagnostic lung scan classification and induces only minor changes in pulmonary vascular obstruction in the majority of patients.

Acute Disease↗

Value of chest X-ray combined with perfusion scan versus ventilation/perfusion scan in acute pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: The main purpose of ventilation scanning, as adjunct to perfusion lung scintigraphy, in acute pulmonary embolism is to allow for the classification of segmental perfusion defects as mismatched, which is generally accepted as proof for the presence of pulmonary embolism. We examined whether this function of the ventilation scan could be replaced by the chest X-ray. METHODS: In 389 consecutive patients with suspected pulmonary embolism and at least one segmental perfusion defect we classified the ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) scan and chest X-ray/perfusion (X/Q) scan as either mismatched or matched. Furthermore we analyzed whether this comparison was different in subgroups of patients with concomitant congestive heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. RESULTS: Overall agreement between the X/Q and V/Q scan diagnostic category was found in 341 of 389 patients (88%; 95% CI 84-92%). The positive predictive value for obtaining a mismatched V/Q scan result in case of a mismatched X/Q scan result was 86% (95% CI 81-90%). If the X/Q scan yielded only matched defects the V/Q scan resulted in the same classification in 90% (95% CI 85-95%). Analysis of the small subgroup of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease showed that a mismatched X/Q scan was confirmed by V/Q scanning in 21 of 34 cases (62%; 95% CI 45-78%). CONCLUSION: This study shows that in the great majority of patients with clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism combination of chest X-ray with perfusion scintigraphy reliably replaced ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy in defining (mis)-matching of segmental perfusion defects. These results need confirmation before the chest X-ray can fully obviate the use of ventilation scintigraphy.

Adult↗