Time trend analysis of pulmonary embolism diagnosis with single-photon emission computed tomography ventilation/perfusion imaging
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Following the implementation of single-photon emission computed tomography ventilation/perfusion (SPECT V/Q) in our department, we previously carried out an observational study over the period 2011-2013 that showed the safety of SPECT V/Q to rule out pulmonary embolism (PE). However, PE prevalence (28%) was high compared with some studies. Our hypothesis was that the use of SPECT V/Q may be responsible for an overdiagnosis of PE, especially at the implementation phase of the test. The aim was to carry out a time trend analysis of the evolution over the years of PE diagnosis with SPECT V/Q. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To evaluate the time trend of SPECT V/Q results, the conclusions of all SPECT V/Q scans performed for a suspected acute PE in our department from April 2011 to December 2016 were collected. To confirm the safety of a diagnostic management on the basis of SPECT V/Q to rule out PE, a retrospective observational study of the outcome of patients assessed with SPECT V/Q for suspected acute PE was carried out during the period 2014-2016. SPECT V/Q was interpreted using a diagnostic cutoff of one segmental or two subsegmental mismatches. The final diagnostic conclusion was established by the physician responsible for patient care. The safety of SPECT V/Q was assessed by monitoring the risk of thromboembolic events during the 3-month follow-up period in patients left untreated on the basis of a negative SPECT V/Q. RESULTS: Over the period 2011-2016, an average 16% (95% confidence interval: 10-22%) annual reduction in the proportion of positive SPECT V/Q results was observed. The percentage of positive SPECT V/Q results was 25.3% over the period 2011-2013 compared with 16.3% in 2014-2016 (P<0.0001). Out of the 696 patients analyzed over the period 2014-2016, the SPECT V/Q was positive, indeterminate, and negative in 118, 3, and 575 patients, respectively. The 3-month thromboembolic risk in patients in whom PE was deemed absent according to the SPECT V/Q was 3/543=0.55% (95% confidence interval 0.19-1.61). CONCLUSION: A continuous decrease in the annual proportion of positive SPECT V/Q results was mainly observed while maintaining the safety of the test to rule out PE. Explanatory factors include the introduction of a combined SPECT/CT scan, increased experience and familiarity with the test, and an increased awareness of the risks and consequences of overdiagnosing PE.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».