Accuracy of CT in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE We sought to summarize systematically the published evidence describing the accuracy of contrast-enhanced helical CT for diagnosing pulmonary embolism. MATERIALS AND METHODS We selected all systematic reviews published before December 2003 that evaluated the accuracy of CT angiography for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. We also selected all prospective studies from the same time period in the primary literature in which all subjects underwent both CT and conventional angiography, the latter being considered the reference standard. Articles were identified through a computerized MEDLINE search and by other means. The quality and content of each article were evaluated independently by pairs of researchers. RESULTS Six systematic reviews and eight primary studies were selected. The combined sensitivities of CT for detecting pulmonary embolism ranged from 66% to 93% across the systematic reviews and the combined specificities ranged from 89% to 97%. Only one of the reviews reported a combined sensitivity of greater than 90%. Among the eight primary studies, the sensitivities ranged from 45% to 100% and specificities ranged from 78% to 100%. Only three of the eight primary studies reported a sensitivity greater than 90%. None of the primary studies used scanners with four or more detectors. CONCLUSION A systematic literature review revealed a wide range of reported sensitivities, only a minority of which exceeded 90%. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity reported by systematic literature reviews should be interpreted with caution because of potential selection bias and heterogeneity in the reviewed studies. Accuracy studies of recent generations of MDCT scanners are not yet available despite the current dissemination of this technology.

[1]  S. Cavanaugh,et al.  Computed tomography scan versus ventilation-perfusion lung scan in the detection of pulmonary embolism. , 2001, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[2]  I. Olkin,et al.  Improving the quality of reports of meta‐analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 2000, Revista espanola de salud publica.

[3]  T. Chalmers,et al.  Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  U Joseph Schoepf,et al.  CT angiography for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: state of the art. , 2004, Radiology.

[5]  J. Philbrick,et al.  The role of spiral volumetric computed tomography in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. , 2000, Archives of internal medicine.

[6]  A Vieillard-Baron,et al.  Pulmonary embolism detection: prospective evaluation of dual-section helical CT versus selective pulmonary arteriography in 157 patients. , 2000, Radiology.

[7]  J. Leyendecker,et al.  Effect of anatomic distribution of pulmonary emboli on interobserver agreement in the interpretation of pulmonary angiography. , 1998, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[8]  Y. Safriel,et al.  CT pulmonary angiography in the detection of pulmonary emboli: a meta-analysis of sensitivities and specificities. , 2002, Clinical imaging.

[9]  D. Cook,et al.  Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized control trials in health care from the Potsdam Consultation on Meta-Analysis. , 1995, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[10]  K. McHugh CT dose reduction in pediatric patients. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  Jesse A Berlin,et al.  Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? , 1997, The Lancet.

[12]  G. Raskob,et al.  Sensitivity and Specificity of Helical Computed Tomography in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism , 2000, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[13]  H. Sostman,et al.  Overview of Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis II. , 2002, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[14]  M. Oudkerk,et al.  Lung Scintigraphy and Helical Computed Tomography for the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism: A Meta-Analysis , 2001, Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis.

[15]  David R. Jones,et al.  Systematic reviews of trials and other studies. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[16]  A R Jadad,et al.  Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[17]  J. Remy,et al.  Central pulmonary thromboembolism: diagnosis with spiral volumetric CT with the single-breath-hold technique--comparison with pulmonary angiography. , 1992, Radiology.

[18]  A Gottschalk,et al.  Reassessment of pulmonary angiography for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: relation of interpreter agreement to the order of the involved pulmonary arterial branch. , 1999, Radiology.

[19]  R. Kuzo,et al.  CT evaluation of pulmonary embolism: technique and interpretation. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  N. Ferran,et al.  Primera elección diagnóstica en pacientes con alta sospecha clínica de tromboembolismo pulmonar: ¿gammagrafía de ventilación/ perfusión pulmonar o tomografía computarizada helicoidal? , 2005 .

[21]  Patrick M M Bossuyt,et al.  Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  D. Slosman,et al.  Performance of Helical Computed Tomography in Unselected Outpatients with Suspected Pulmonary Embolism , 2001, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[23]  X Marchandise,et al.  Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with spiral CT: comparison with pulmonary angiography and scintigraphy. , 1996, Radiology.

[24]  P. J. Hagen,et al.  Diagnosing acute pulmonary embolism: effect of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on the performance of D-dimer testing, ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy, spiral computed tomographic angiography, and conventional angiography. ANTELOPE Study Group. Advances in New Technologies Evaluating the Loc , 2000, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[25]  U. Schoepf,et al.  CT in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[26]  C. Langlotz,et al.  Accuracy of CT angiography versus pulmonary angiography in the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism: evaluation of the literature with summary ROC curve analysis. , 2000, Academic radiology.

[27]  P. Investigators,et al.  Value of the ventilation/perfusion scan in acute pulmonary embolism. Results of the prospective investigation of pulmonary embolism diagnosis (PIOPED). , 1990 .

[28]  P. Girard Approche diagnostique de la maladie thromboembolique veineuse , 2005 .

[29]  A. Feinstein,et al.  Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. , 1978, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  G. Velmahos,et al.  Spiral computed tomography for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in critically ill surgical patients: a comparison with pulmonary angiography. , 2001, Archives of surgery.

[31]  W D Foley,et al.  Detection of pulmonary embolism in patients with unresolved clinical and scintigraphic diagnosis: helical CT versus angiography. , 1995, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[32]  Peter Jüni,et al.  Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. , 2002, International journal of epidemiology.

[33]  F. Chabot,et al.  Spiral-computed tomography versus pulmonary angiography in the diagnosis of acute massive pulmonary embolism. , 1994, The American journal of cardiology.

[34]  T. McLoud,et al.  Acute pulmonary embolism: assessment of helical CT for diagnosis. , 1998, Radiology.

[35]  G H Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 1994, JAMA.

[36]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. , 1991, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[37]  Xiao-Hua Zhou,et al.  Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine , 2002 .

[38]  F. Christiansen Diagnostic imaging of acute pulmonary embolism. , 1997, Acta radiologica. Supplementum.