Diagnostic Imaging Pathways - Pulmonary Embolism (Haemodynamically Stable)
- Pathway Home
- Pathway
- Images
- Teaching Points
- hs1
- hs2
- hs3
- hs4
- hs5
- hs6
- hs7
- hs8
- hs9
- References
- Information for Consumers
- copyright
Pathway Home
Population Covered By The Guidance
This pathway provides a diagnostic imaging algorithm for adult patients with suspected pulmonary embolism and who are haemodynamically stable.
Date reviewed: June 2017
Date of next review: June 2020
Published: February 2018
Quick User Guide
Move the mouse cursor over the PINK text boxes inside the flow chart to bring up a pop up box with salient points.
Clicking on the PINK text box will bring up the full text.
The relative radiation level of each imaging investigation is displayed in the pop up box.
| SYMBOL | RRL | EFFECTIVE DOSE RANGE | |
 |
None | 0 | |
 |
Minimal | < 1 millisieverts | |
 |
Low | 1-5 mSv | |
 |
Medium | 5-10 mSv | |
 |
High | >10 mSv |
Images
Image GalleryNote: These images open in a new page | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 |  |
Hampton's Hump Image 1 (Plain Radiograph): There is a peripheral wedge shaped opacity representing pulmonary infarction and atelectasis secondary to a pulmonary embolus (arrow). This radiographic sign is referred to as Hampton's Hump. |
| 2a |  |
Bilateral Pulmonary Embolism Image 2a and 2b (Computed Tomography): Axial and reconstructed images of bilateral pulmonary arterial emboli (arrows) |
| 2b |  |
|
| 3 |  |
Bilateral Pulmonary Embolism Image 3 (Ventilation Perfusion Scan): The ventilation series demonstrates uniform distribution of tracer throughout both lung fields. The perfusion series demonstrates generalised reduced tracer uptake in the right lung with multiple segmental and subsegmental perfusion defects throughout both lung fields. These findings have a high probability for recent pulmonary embolism. |
Teaching Points
Teaching Points
- Prior to imaging, one must clinically calculate the probability of PE. This is based on the validated 'Wells Criteria'. Other criteria which have shown good pre-test probabilities are the Revised Geneva Score and Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC)
- Chest radiograph in suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) is to exclude other causes that may mimic PE and to guide further investigations
- Patients who are at low probability for PE should have a D-Dimer. A negative D-Dimer in a low probability case of suspected PE rules out the diagnosis and no further investigation is indicated
- Patients with moderate to high pre-test probability of PE should have further imaging
- The choice of imaging is reliant on a 'normal' chest radiograph and whether the patient has a history of a chronic underlying lung disease
- Patients with a normal chest radiograph and no history of lung disease should proceed to radionuclide scan
- Patients with an abnormal chest radiograph or history of lung disease should proceed to CTPA
hs1
Pulmonary Embolism (Haemodynamically Stable)
- Pulmonary embolism refers to obstruction of the pulmonary artery or one of its branches by material (e.g. thrombus, tumour, air, or fat) that originated elsewhere in the body 1
- It is important to determine the onset of presentation as initial imaging can differ. A chronic history, markedly elevated systolic pulmonary arterial pressures, RV and bronchial artery hypertrophy, thrombus calcification, webs and a mosaic perfusion pattern should raise suspicion of chronic rather than acute PE 2, 3
- The role of a chest radiograph in suspected Pulmonary Embolism (PE) is to exclude other causes that may mimic PE and to guide further investigations
- Prior to imaging, one must clinically calculate the probability of PE. This is based on the validated 'Wells Criteria'
- Clinical signs and symptoms of Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)
- PE as or more likely than an alternative diagnosis
- Previous history of DVT
- Active cancer
- Recent immobilisation
- Tachycardia
- Haemoptysis
- Patients who are at low probability for PE should have a D-Dimer. A negative D-Dimer in a low probability case of suspected PE rules out the diagnosis and no further investigation is indicated 4
- Patients with moderate to high pre-test probability of PE should have further imaging
- The choice of imaging is reliant on a 'Normal' chest radiograph and whether the patient has a history of a chronic underlying lung disease
- Patients with a normal chest radiograph and no history of lung disease should proceed to radionuclide scan
- Patients with an abnormal chest radiograph or history of lung disease should proceed to CTPA
hs2
Chest Radiograph
- Mainly useful for excluding conditions that can mimic pulmonary embolism 5
- Features 6
- Approximately 12% of patients with angiographically proven PE have a normal CXR
- The most common CXR findings with PE are atelectasis and parenchymal opacities in the affected lung zone
- Oligaemia was the only CXR finding that occurred significantly more frequently in patients with PE compared to those without.
- Positive predictive value of a normal CXR - 18%
- Negative predictive value of a normal CXR - 74%
- The other main use of a CXR is to assist in determining whether a VQ or a CTPA is the most appropriate next investigation 7
hs3
Clinical Prediction Rules for Pre-test Probability of Pulmonary Embolism
- Clinical prediction rules are now well accepted as key components in the diagnostic approach to pulmonary embolism. The post-test probability of PE depends not only on the accuracy of the test but also on the pre-test probability as determined by these prediction rules as noted in the Table below 9, 10
| Item | Clinical decision rule points |
|
Original version |
Simplified version |
|
| A. Wells criteria 11-13 | ||
| Previous PE or DVT | 1.5 |
1 |
| Heart rate ≥ 100 beats/min | 1.5 |
1 |
| Surgery or immobilization within the past 4 weeks | 1.5 |
1 |
| Haemoptysis | 1 |
1 |
| Active cancer | 1 |
1 |
| Clinical signs of DVT | 3 |
1 |
| Alternative diagnosis less likely than PE | 3 |
1 |
| Clinical probability | ||
| Three-level score | ||
| ■ Low | 0-1 |
Not applicable |
| ■ Intermediate | 2-6 |
Not applicable |
| ■ High | ≥7 |
Not applicable |
| Two-level score | ||
| ■ PE unlikely | 0-4 |
0-1 |
| ■ PE likely | ≥5 |
≥2 |
| B. Revised Geneva score 11, 14, 15 | ||
| Previous PE or DVT | 3 |
1 |
| Heart rate | ||
| ■ 75-94 beats/min | 3 |
1 |
| ■ ≥95 beats/min | 5 |
2 |
| Surgery or fracture within the past month | 2 |
1 |
| Haemoptysis | 2 |
1 |
| Active cancer | 2 |
1 |
| Unilateral lower limb pain | 3 |
1 |
| Pain on lower limb deep venous palpation and unilateral oedema | 4 |
1 |
| Age ≥65 years | 1 |
1 |
| Clinical probability | ||
| Three-level score | ||
| ■ Low | 0-3 |
0-1 |
| ■ Intermediate | 4-10 |
2-1 |
| ■ High | ≥11 |
≥5 |
| Two-level score | ||
| ■ PE unlikely | 0-5 |
0-2 |
| ■ PE likely | ≥6 |
≥3 |
| C. Pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) 11, 16, 17 | ||
| Age ≥50 years | 1 |
|
| Pulse rate ≥ 100 beats/min | 1 |
|
| SaO2 (pulse oximetry) < 95% on room air | 1 |
|
| History of haemoptysis | 1 |
|
| Current exogenous oestrogen use | 1 |
|
| Prior history of venous thromboembolism | 1 |
|
| Recent surgery or trauma in the previous 4 weeks | 1 |
|
| Unilateral leg swelling (on inspection) | 1 |
|
| PERC score | ||
| ■ 0 | Negative (‘PERC ruled out’) |
|
| ■ 1 | Positive (‘PERC rule inclusive’) – further diagnosis is required |
|
- The simplified Geneva score (with a similar accuracy as the Geneva one) identifies a high or low PE probability, especially in combination with D-dimers , with a prognosis value as well 18
- The Wells and simplified Wells scores identify the high or low probability, being improved by the level of D-dimers, having similar results with the Geneva score 18
- When comparing the Wells criteria, Geneva score, revised Geneva score and Charlottes rule, available clinical prediction rules (CPR) for assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism (PE) show similar accuracy 19
- Whether Wells criteria, Geneva score or their revised versions were used, the proportion of patients with PE is around 10% in the low probability category, 30% in the moderate probability category and 65% in the high clinical probability category 9, 10
- The existing scores are, however, not equivalent and the choice among various prediction rules and classification schemes (three- versus two-level) must be guided by local prevalence of PE, type of patients considered (outpatients or inpatients) and type of D-dimer assay applied 19
- Another report has suggested that when comparing diagnostic and prognostic accuracy, the Geneva and the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) scores remain the most valuable instruments of diagnosis and prediction of clinical prognostic outcomes, respectively 18
- PESI predicts the short-term death and adverse outcome events in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. The simplified version has similar accuracy and is easier to use 9, 20
- A recent systematic review and meta-analysis found 12 qualifying studies evaluating the PERC rule and ultimately determined that the pooled sensitivity to rule out pulmonary embolism is 97.2%, which the authors concluded to be a low, but acceptable sensitivity to rule out PE without further testing. The pooled negative LR was 0.17. The overall proportion of missed PEs was 0.32% (44 of 13,855 total cases) 16
- Therefore, it is advised that clinicians not obtain D-Dimer measurements or imaging studies in patients with a low pre-test probability of PE and who meet all PERC criteria 21
hs4
D-Dimer Assay
- D-Dimer is formed as a result of plasmin generated degradation of thrombin and is therefore a marker of the presence of thrombus
- There are various qualitative and quantitative assays available for D-dimer, but in general they have a high sensitivity and negative predictive value for the presence of thrombus 22, 23
- Of the various assays, the quantitative enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) has the best negative likelihood ratio and is significantly superior to non-ELISA assays for excluding the presence of pulmonary embolism (sensitivity >90%, specificity 40%) 9, 24, 25
- A negative quantitative ELISA D-dimer result is as diagnostically useful for excluding PE as a normal helical CT lung scan. (9, 24) In such patients, the 3-month risk of thromboembolism is only 0.14% (95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.41) if no anti-coagulation is given 26
- A negative D-dimer result in a highly sensitive assay (e.g. ELISA) safely excludes PE in patients with a low or moderate clinical probability 24, 25 while a moderately sensitive assay excludes PE only in patients with a low clinical probability 9
- When using the dichotomous clinical prediction rule(which classifies patients as PE unlikely and PE likely), a negative D-dimer result is able to exclude PE safely in PE-unlikely patients either by a highly sensitive or moderately sensitive assay 9
- When PE is suspected, a normal D-Dimer avoids further investigation in about 50% of outpatients and 20% of inpatients 27
hs5
Factors Influencing Choice of Further Tests
- A radionuclide scan emits a lower radiation dose compared to a standard dose(120KvP) CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) and is therefore preferred in younger patients
- Radionuclide scans should also be performed in those with contraindications to CT with contrast including patients with iodinated contrast allergy and with severe renal impairment. For more details, please see section on Contrast Media and Contrast Induced Nephrotoxicity
- Radionuclide scans are frequently non-diagnostic in those with abnormalities on chest radiography or with known chronic lung disease and CTPA should be considered in these patients
- Availability of new generation MDCTs with dose reduction technologies can also influence the choice of investigation as these have been shown to cause far less radiation exposure compared to traditional CTPAs 28
- Patient's body habitus, inability to co-operate with CT examination may hinder performing CTPA in these patients and radionuclide VQ scan may need to be used
hs6
Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filters
- Routine use of IVC filters is not recommended 2
- Should be considered in patients with 22, 29
- Absolute or relative contraindication to anticoagulation
- Complication of anticoagulation
- Failure of anticoagulation
- Recurrent PE despite adequate therapy
- Inability to achieve / maintain adequate anticoagulation
- Propagation / progression of DVT during therapeutic anticoagulation
- Massive PE with residual DVT in a patient at risk for further PE
- Free-floating iliofemoral or IVC thrombus
- Severe cardiopulmonary disease and DVT (eg, cor pulmonale with pulmonary hypertension)
hs7
Bilateral Lower Limb Doppler Ultrasound
- The role of Doppler ultrasound in the evaluation of patients with suspected PE is controversial
- Approximately 10% of patients with a PE will have an abnormal ultrasound and a further 2% will have evidence of DVT on serial scans 30
- May be useful if the pre-test probability is discordant with the result of the VQ scan or CTPA 30
- Advantages:
- Widely available
- Non-invasive
- Limitations:
- Low sensitivity for patients with PE
hs8
Radionuclide Lung Scan
- Lung perfusion images are taken after the intravenous injection of technetium-99m macroaggregated albumin. A PE characteristically appears as a pleural based segmental perfusion defect 3
- Any perfusion defects are compared to ventilation images and any regions of mismatch are considered suspect for PE 3
- Ventilation perfusion scans, compared to CTPA, are associated with lower radiation exposure but the extreme difference between the effective doses as existed previously has been reduced drastically with the new generation MDCT helical scanners that use low dose (using tube currents of 80kVp or 100kVp) 28, 31-34
- A perfusion scan alone (without the ventilation scan) can lead to significant reductions in cost and radiation exposure. A normal perfusion scan excludes PE with a negative predictive value close to 100% 16, 35-37
- A Ventilation-Perfusion scan has the following diagnostic features 4, 38
- A high-probability scan usually indicates PE but only a minority of patients with PE have a high probability scan
- A low-probability scan combined with a low pre-test probability of PE makes a PE very unlikely
- An intermediate-probability scan is not usually helpful in establishing a diagnosis. Patients with an intermediate-probability scan (or low-probability scan with a high pre-test probability) should be reviewed and considered for further testing with a CTPA if there is persisting clinical suspicion for PE
- Limitations
- Frequent non-diagnostic results, particularly for patients with an abnormal chest radiograph or a significant history of chronic obstructive lung disease 8
- Advantages
- Lower radiation exposure compared to standard dose CT Pulmonary Angiography
- Widely available
- A normal scan useful for excluding PE in the majority of patients 38
- High sensitivity, specificity and accuracy in chronic pulmonary embolism and is the first choice of investigation in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension 39, 40
hs9
CT Pulmonary Angiography (CTPA)
- Multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is now the primary imaging modality for evaluating acute PE 7, 41, 42
- Demonstrates a pulmonary embolism by showing a filling defect within contrast filled pulmonary arteries
- New generation MDCT (64 slice helical scanners) with low tube currents (80kVp, 100kVp and 120kVp) with / without dose modulations have been shown to not affect image quality of the angiography studies and at the same time have reduced effective radiation doses by 40% to 60% compared to the older scanners (140kVp). 31-33, 43 Also of note is the increase in contrast enhancement with low voltage scans and reduced amount of contrast medium needed for the study 28
- These MDCTs are increasingly available and should be the first choice of modality in acute PE as long as no contraindications for contrast material exists
- The radiation exposure is of particular importance to young females with breast tissue that has a higher turnover rate, who are therefore most susceptible to radiation-induced carcinogenesis. The absorbed dose to the breast tissue by CTPA was estimated between 10-30 mGy, which was 30-40 times greater compared to a perfusion scan but recent studies with newer MDCT scanners have been shown to deliver much lower organ doses to breast skin and breast parenchyma 31, 44
- A single-centre study to compare breast radiation dose in women undergoing CTPA protocol found decreasing the default peak kV resulted in an 88% and 79% reduction in monitoring scan breast dose for pregnant and non-pregnant patients, respectively 44
- Studies using bismuth breast shields have shown radiation dose reductions of 34-57% to the breast, without significant decrease in image quality or diagnostic accuracy 45-47
- The role of CTPA in the diagnostic algorithm for PE is dependent to some degree on the type of scanner available
- Older scanners are limited by relatively long scan times and the associated respiratory motion artefact 3
- Multi-slice CTPA has a number of advantages over older scanners that make it the central imaging modality for the investigation of PE at many centres
- High acquisition speed meaning larger volumes can be covered more quickly 48
- Better detection of sub-segmental emboli 7, 49-53
- Better interobserver agreement rates 7, 49
- The Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis II (PIOPED II) trial reported a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 96% using mainly 4-row multi-detector CT(MDCT) without consistent use of bolus tracking contrast administration. Discordant CTPA and pre-test clinical risk stratification required further investigation. The negative predictive value of high risk patients with a negative CTPA was only 60% and the positive predictive value of patients at low risk with a positive CTPA was 58%. Relatively high rates (6%) of studies were non-diagnostic 54
- A systematic review of 49 studies with 13,162 patients found that increased RV/LV diameter ratio measured on transverse CT images conferred the strongest risk for PE related mortality compared to other CT parameters 55
- A recent randomised study by Righini et al, compared one group who were assessed with D-Dimer followed by multislice CTPA, to another group had D-Dimer followed by lower limb venous ultrasonography and CTPA for exclusion of pulmonary embolism. Their primary outcome was the proportion of venous thromboembolic events in the 3-month follow-up period in each group in patients who were left untreated on the basis of the exclusion of pulmonary embolism by the diagnostic strategy. They found no difference in the 3 month thromboembolic risk between the groups (0.3% for each group respectively). Based on this evidence, pulmonary embolism can effectively be excluded with a negative CTPA in patients who have a low or moderate pre-test probability 56
- CT is also able to provide information on alternative diagnoses that may mimic PE and has high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy in chronic PE. 42, 57, 58 CTPA findings may also correlate with surgical outcomes in these cases 39, 40
- Limitations
- Radiation exposure if standard protocol if being implemented.
- Risk of contrast allergy and renal impairment.
- Subject to interpretive pitfalls such as respiratory motion artefact, streak artefact and problems related to patient body habitus 59
References
References
Date of literature search: July 2017
References are graded from Level I to V according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Levels of Evidence. Download the document
- Thompson BT. Overview of acute pulmonary embolism in adults UptoDate2016 [cited 2016 April 12]. Available from: View the reference
- Condliffe R, Elliot CA, Hughes RJ, Hurdman J, Maclean RM, Sabroe I, et al. Management dilemmas in acute pulmonary embolism. Thorax. 2014;69(2):174-80. (Review article). View the reference
- Donkers-van Rossum AB. Diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism. Eur Respir J. 2001;18(3):589-97. (Review article). View the reference
- Curtis BR, Cox M, Poplawski M, Lyshchik A. Low yield of ventilation and perfusion imaging for the evaluation of pulmonary embolism after indeterminate CT pulmonary angiography. Emerg Radiol. 2017:503-9. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Worsley DF, Alavi A. Radionuclide imaging of acute pulmonary embolism. Radiol Clin North Am. 2001;39(5):1035-52. (Review article). View the reference
- Worsley DF, Alavi A, Aronchick JM, Chen JT, Greenspan RH, Ravin CE. Chest radiographic findings in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: observations from the PIOPED Study. Radiology. 1993;189(1):133-6. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Bettmann MA, Baginski SG, White RD, Woodard PK, Abbara S, Atalay MK, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria(R) acute chest pain--suspected pulmonary embolism J Thorac Imaging. 2012;27(2):W28-31. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Forbes KP, Reid JH, Murchison JT. Do preliminary chest X-ray findings define the optimum role of pulmonary scintigraphy in suspected pulmonary embolism? Clin Radiol. 2001;56(5):397-400. (Level III evidence) View the reference
- Konstantinides SV, Torbicki A, Agnelli G, Danchin N, Fitzmaurice D, Galie N, et al. 2014 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J. 2014;35(43):3033-69, 69a-69k. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Stein PD, Woodard PK, Weg JG, Wakefield TW, Tapson VF, Sostman HD, et al. Diagnostic pathways in acute pulmonary embolism: recommendations of the PIOPED II Investigators. Radiology. 2007;242(1):15-21. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Fesmire FM, Brown MD, Espinosa JA, Shih RD, Silvers SM, Wolf SJ, et al. Critical issues in the evaluation and management of adult patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;57(6):628-52.e75. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, Ginsberg JS, Kearon C, Gent M, et al. Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED D-dimer. Thromb Haemost. 2000;83(3):416-20. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, Stiell I, Dreyer JF, Barnes D, et al. Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside without diagnostic imaging: management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism presenting to the emergency department by using a simple clinical model and d-dimer. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135(2):98-107. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Wong DD, Ramaseshan G, Mendelson RM. Comparison of the Wells and Revised Geneva Scores for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: an Australian experience. Intern Med J. 2011;41(3):258-63. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Klok FA, Kruisman E, Spaan J, Nijkeuter M, Righini M, Aujesky D, et al. Comparison of the revised Geneva score with the Wells rule for assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2008;6(1):40-4. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Singh B, Parsaik AK, Agarwal D, Surana A, Mascarenhas SS, Chandra S. Diagnostic accuracy of pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;59(6):517-20.e1-4. (Level I evidence). View the reference
- Stojanovska J, Carlos RC, Kocher KE, Nagaraju A, Guy K, Kelly AM, et al. CT Pulmonary Angiography: Using Decision Rules in the Emergency Department. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12(10):1023-9. View the reference
- Ouatu A, Tanase DM, Ionescu SD, Rezus C, Ambarus V, Arsenescu-Georgescu C. The importance of clinical prediction models in non-fatal pulmonary embolism: an analysis of the best known clinical scores. Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi. 2014;118(4):932-41. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Ceriani E, Combescure C, Le Gal G, Nendaz M, Perneger T, Bounameaux H, et al. Clinical prediction rules for pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost. 2010;8(5):957-70. (Level I evidence). View the reference
- Zhou XY, Ben SQ, Chen HL, Ni SS. The prognostic value of pulmonary embolism severity index in acute pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis Respir Res. 2012;13:111. View the reference
- Raja AS, Greenberg JO, Qaseem A, Denberg TD, Fitterman N, Schuur JD. Evaluation of Patients With Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Best Practice Advice From the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(9):701-11. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Lee CH, Hankey GJ, Ho WK, Eikelboom JW. Venous thromboembolism: diagnosis and management of pulmonary embolism. Med J Aust. 2005;182(11):569-74. (Review article). View the reference
- Freyburger G, Trillaud H, Labrouche S, Gauthier P, Javorschi S, Bernard P, et al. D-dimer strategy in thrombosis exclusion--a gold standard study in 100 patients suspected of deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism: 8 DD methods compared. Thromb Haemost. 1998;79(1):32-7. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Stein PD, Hull RD, Patel KC, Olson RE, Ghali WA, Brant R, et al. D-dimer for the exclusion of acute venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(8):589-602. (Level I evidence). View the reference
- Roy PM, Colombet I, Durieux P, Chatellier G, Sors H, Meyer G. Systematic review and meta-analysis of strategies for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism. Bmj. 2005;331(7511):259. (Level I evidence). View the reference
- Carrier M, Righini M, Djurabi RK, Huisman MV, Perrier A, Wells PS, et al. VIDAS D-dimer in combination with clinical pre-test probability to rule out pulmonary embolism. A systematic review of management outcome studies. Thromb Haemost. 2009;101(5):886-92. (Level I evidence). View the reference
- Agnelli G, Becattini C. Acute pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(3):266-74. (Review article). View the reference
- Zamboni GA, Guariglia S, Bonfante A, Martino C, Cavedon C, Mucelli RP. Low voltage CTPA for patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(4):e580-4. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Caplin DM, Nikolic B, Kalva SP, Ganguli S, Saad WE, Zuckerman DA. Quality improvement guidelines for the performance of inferior vena cava filter placement for the prevention of pulmonary embolism. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011;22(11):1499-506. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Wells PS, Ginsberg JS, Anderson DR, Kearon C, Gent M, Turpie AG, et al. Use of a clinical model for safe management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129(12):997-1005. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Litmanovich D, Tack D, Lin PJ, Boiselle PM, Raptopoulos V, Bankier AA. Female breast, lung, and pelvic organ radiation from dose-reduced 64-MDCT thoracic examination protocols: a phantom study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(4):929-34. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Szucs-Farkas Z, Schibler F, Cullmann J, Torrente JC, Patak MA, Raible S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of pulmonary CT angiography at low tube voltage: intraindividual comparison of a normal-dose protocol at 120 kVp and a low-dose protocol at 80 kVp using reduced amount of contrast medium in a simulation study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(5):W852-9. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Szucs-Farkas Z, Kurmann L, Strautz T, Patak MA, Vock P, Schindera ST. Patient exposure and image quality of low-dose pulmonary computed tomography angiography: comparison of 100- and 80-kVp protocols. Invest Radiol. 2008;43(12):871-6. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Ruggiero A, Screaton NJ. Imaging of acute and chronic thromboembolic disease: state of the art. Clin Radiol. 2017;72(5):375-88. (Review article). View the reference
- Remy-Jardin M, Pistolesi M, Goodman LR, Gefter WB, Gottschalk A, Mayo JR, et al. Management of suspected acute pulmonary embolism in the era of CT angiography: a statement from the Fleischner Society Radiology. 2007;245(2):315-29. (Review article). View the reference
- Hull RD, Raskob GE, Coates G, Panju AA. Clinical validity of a normal perfusion lung scan in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Chest. 1990;97(1):23-6. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Kipper MS, Moser KM, Kortman KE, Ashburn WL. Longterm follow-up of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism and a normal lung scan. Perfusion scans in embolic suspects. Chest. 1982;82(4):411-5. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Value of the ventilation/perfusion scan in acute pulmonary embolism. Results of the prospective investigation of pulmonary embolism diagnosis (PIOPED). Jama. 1990;263(20):2753-9. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- He J, Fang W, Lv B, He JG, Xiong CM, Liu ZH, et al. Diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: comparison of ventilation/perfusion scanning and multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography with pulmonary angiography. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33(5):459-63. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Mehta S, Helmersen D, Provencher S, Hirani N, Rubens FD, De Perrot M, et al. Diagnostic evaluation and management of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a clinical practice guideline. Can Respir J. 2010;17(6):301-34. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Kirsch J, Brown RKJ, Henry TS, Javidan-Nejad C, Jokerst C, Julsrud PR, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria(R) Acute Chest Pain-Suspected Pulmonary Embolism. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14(5s):2-12. (Guidelines). View the reference
- Dogan H, de Roos A, Geleijins J, Huisman MV, Kroft LJ. The role of computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute and chronic pulmonary embolism. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2015;21(4):307-16. (Review article). View the reference
- Megyeri B, Christe A, Schindera ST, Horkay E, Sikula J, Cullmann JL, et al. Diagnostic confidence and image quality of CT pulmonary angiography at 100 kVp in overweight and obese patients. Clin Radiol. 2015;70(1):54-61. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Mitchell DP, Rowan M, Loughman E, Ridge CA, MacMahon PJ. Contrast monitoring techniques in CT pulmonary angiography: An important and underappreciated contributor to breast dose. European Journal of Radiology. 2017;86:184-9. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Hopper KD, King SH, Lobell ME, TenHave TR, Weaver JS. The breast: in-plane x-ray protection during diagnostic thoracic CT--shielding with bismuth radioprotective garments. Radiology. 1997;205(3):853-8. (Level IV evidence). View the reference
- Hopper KD. Orbital, thyroid, and breast superficial radiation shielding for patients undergoing diagnostic CT. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2002;23(5):423-7. (Level IV evidence). View the reference
- Colombo P, Pedroli G, Nicoloso M, Re S, Valvassori L, Vanzulli A. Evaluation of the efficacy of a bismuth shield during CT examinations. Radiol Med. 2004;108(5-6):560-8. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- McCollough CH, Zink FE. Performance evaluation of a multi-slice CT system. Med Phys. 1999;26(11):2223-30. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Schoepf UJ, Holzknecht N, Helmberger TK, Crispin A, Hong C, Becker CR, et al. Subsegmental pulmonary emboli: improved detection with thin-collimation multi-detector row spiral CT. Radiology. 2002;222(2):483-90. (Level IV evidence). View the reference
- Schoepf UJ, Costello P. CT angiography for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: state of the art. Radiology. 2004;230(2):329-37. (Review article). View the reference
- Patel S, Kazerooni EA, Cascade PN. Pulmonary embolism: optimization of small pulmonary artery visualization at multi-detector row CT Radiology. 2003;227(2):455-60. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Remy-Jardin M, Tillie-Leblond I, Szapiro D, Ghaye B, Cotte L, Mastora I, et al. CT angiography of pulmonary embolism in patients with underlying respiratory disease: impact of multislice CT on image quality and negative predictive value. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(8):1971-8. (Level IV evidence). View the reference
- Coche E, Verschuren F, Keyeux A, Goffette P, Goncette L, Hainaut P, et al. Diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism in outpatients: comparison of thin-collimation multi-detector row spiral CT and planar ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy. Radiology. 2003;229(3):757-65. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Stein PD, Fowler SE, Goodman LR, Gottschalk A, Hales CA, Hull RD, et al. Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(22):2317-27. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Meinel FG, Nance JW, Jr., Schoepf UJ, Hoffmann VS, Thierfelder KM, Costello P, et al. Predictive Value of Computed Tomography in Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Med. 2015;128(7):747-59. (Level I evidence). View the reference
- Righini M, Le Gal G, Aujesky D, Roy PM, Sanchez O, Verschuren F, et al. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism by multidetector CT alone or combined with venous ultrasonography of the leg: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9621):1343-52. (Level II evidence). View the reference
- Kim KI, Muller NL, Mayo JR. Clinically suspected pulmonary embolism: utility of spiral CT. Radiology. 1999;210(3):693-7. (Level III evidence). View the reference
- Garg K, Sieler H, Welsh CH, Johnston RJ, Russ PD. Clinical validity of helical CT being interpreted as negative for pulmonary embolism: implications for patient treatment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172(6):1627-31. (Level IV evidence). View the reference
- Aviram G, Levy G, Fishman JE, Blank A, Graif M. Pitfalls in the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism on spiral computer tomography. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2004;33(2):74-84. (Level IV evidence). View the reference
Information for Consumers
Information for Consumers
Information from this website |
Information from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists’ website |
|
Consent to Procedure or Treatment Radiation Risks of X-rays and Scans Computed Tomography (CT) Angiography Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filters |
Iodine-Containing Contrast Medium Radiation Risk of Medical Imaging During Pregnancy Radiation Risk of Medical Imaging for Adults and Children |
copyright
Copyright
© Copyright 2018, Department of Health Western Australia. All Rights Reserved. This web site and its content has been prepared by The Department of Health, Western Australia. The information contained on this web site is protected by copyright.
Legal Notice
Please remember that this leaflet is intended as general information only. It is not definitive and The Department of Health, Western Australia can not accept any legal liability arising from its use. The information is kept as up to date and accurate as possible, but please be warned that it is always subject to change
.File Formats
Some documents for download on this website are in a Portable Document Format (PDF). To read these files you might need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader.
